Re: [core] Ben Campbell's Discuss on draft-ietf-core-senml-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Ari Keränen <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ben,

> On 18 May 2018, at 19.34, Ben Campbell <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Ari, please see comments inline. I’ve removed sections that don’t seem to need further discussion.
> 
>> On May 7, 2018, at 11:52 AM, Ari Keränen <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
> 
> 
>>> Hopefully this is easy to address:
>>> 
>>> §4.7  talks about how SenML can also be used to configure parameters and
>>> controlling actuators. That capability has some rather significant security
>>> implications, but I failed to find mention of it in the security
>>> considerations. That needs to be explicitly discussed.
>> 
>> Now Section 13 mentions actuator use explicitly:
>> 
>> When SenML is used for configuration or
>> actuation, it can be used to change the state of systems and also
>> impact the physical world, e.g., by turning off a heater or opening a
>> lock.
>> 
>> The SenML formats alone do not provide any security and instead rely
>> on the protocol that carries them to provide security.  Applications
>> using SenML need to look at the overall context of how these formats
>> will be used to decide if the security is adequate.  In particular
>> for sensitive sensor data and actuation use it is important to ensure
>> that proper security mechanims are used.
> 
> That is sufficient to clear my discuss.
> 
> However, I suggest adding something to the following effect to the first paragraph:
> 
> “Malicious use of SenML to change system state could have severe consequences, potentially including violation of physical security, property damage, and even loss of life."
> 
> […]

Great! And this addition sounds good to me. Alexey mentioned that we could include this as RFC editor note. Sounded like a good way to ensure we can move forward efficiently.


Thanks,
Ari