Re: [COSE] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-cose-hash-sig-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Wed, 04 December 2019 22:52 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81020120033; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 14:52:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yFT5Wttf_-u2; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 14:52:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AD3B12002F; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 14:52:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mit.edu ([24.16.140.251]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id xB4MqUXx016101 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 4 Dec 2019 17:52:33 -0500
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2019 14:52:29 -0800
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Cc: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, cose-chairs@ietf.org, cose <cose@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20191204225229.GU32847@mit.edu>
References: <157539486101.24700.12161503456212968239.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <53448421-CFA3-49D1-88CE-92D759E8D825@vigilsec.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <53448421-CFA3-49D1-88CE-92D759E8D825@vigilsec.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cose/mN1B3LskgOuYa54DXAporokwss8>
Subject: Re: [COSE] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-cose-hash-sig-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption <cose.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cose>, <mailto:cose-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cose/>
List-Post: <mailto:cose@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cose-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose>, <mailto:cose-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 22:52:37 -0000

On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 05:50:33PM -0500, Russ Housley wrote:
> Ben:
> 
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > DISCUSS:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > I do see the previous discussion in
> > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cose/E6ApKPKlESQQSZwySJAVF1l27OE
> > but I am still unclear on where exactly we can represent the octet
> > string that is the HMS-LMS public key.  Do we not need to define a COSE
> > Key Type Parameter (i.e., label) that maps to the public key value?  For
> > reference, the examples in Appendix C.7.1 of RFC 8152 include key/value
> > pairs with the negative map labels from
> > https://www.iana.org/assignments/cose/cose.xhtml#key-type-parameters
> > corresponding to the key type in question.
> > Hopefully I'm just confused and missing where this is already done, but
> > marking as a Discuss point in case I'm not.  (The linked
> > cose-wg/Examples seem to be using a JSON structure to describe the input
> > to the example generation, with the "public" and "private" members of
> > the "key" that do not seem to correspond to anything that I can find at
> > https://www.iana.org/assignments/jose/jose.xhtml#web-key-parameters, and
> > which would in any case not directly apply to the *COSE* usage.)
> 
> I suggest:
> 
> 6.3.  COSE Key Type Parameters Registry Entry
> 
>   The new entry in the "COSE Key Type Parameters" registry [IANA] has
>   the following columns:
> 
>      Key Type:  TBD  (Value to be assigned above by IANA)
> 
>      Name:  pub
> 
>      Label:  TBD (Value to be assigned by IANA)
> 
>      CBOR Type:  bstr
> 
>      Description:  Public key for HSS/LMS hash-based digital signature
> 
>      Reference:  This document (Number to be assigned by RFC Editor)

That's basically what I had in mind; thanks!
(We could perhaps number the different TBDs but this case is not too
complicated...)

-Ben