Re: [dane] Second WGLC draft-ietf-dane-smime

"Garfinkel, Simson L. (Fed)" <simson.garfinkel@nist.gov> Thu, 17 November 2016 14:11 UTC

Return-Path: <simson.garfinkel@nist.gov>
X-Original-To: dane@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dane@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCE811296D3 for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 06:11:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nistgov.onmicrosoft.com
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 x4NHH1pnLQWt for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 06:11:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gcc01-dm2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-dm2gcc01on0116.outbound.protection.outlook.com [23.103.201.116]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8B08129590 for <dane@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 06:11:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nistgov.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-nist-gov; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=DCq19/Igc2g2frMH66wKxVEiQTy+7nV0ErGI64ZQHGA=; b=ReK3KnhveRWA0f7UHIPkIt288ApIffvfEkZBOLlQm+igctevun8+NmN5j1jdQbI4CRSjmqDs6mqrq4NJJ/A0Xb3PVO/ytlX0/CdH85Uqo5v2+AiTaJCkADsx04tbi4HE1q0wi+JWXSRhcHIHePRRj4xa5kNyQW9xgGJvfP3D548=
Received: from DM2PR09MB0576.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (10.161.252.22) by DM2PR09MB0574.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (10.161.252.20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.734.8; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 14:11:48 +0000
Received: from DM2PR09MB0576.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.252.22]) by DM2PR09MB0576.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.252.22]) with mapi id 15.01.0734.007; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 14:11:48 +0000
From: "Garfinkel, Simson L. (Fed)" <simson.garfinkel@nist.gov>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Thread-Topic: [dane] Second WGLC draft-ietf-dane-smime
Thread-Index: AQHSPjq1S3DkWlbj20OswExOk6brCqDQfVGAgAxrAgD/8+ISAIAMcjaA
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 14:11:48 +0000
Message-ID: <E8953B83-5D02-4AE8-9E95-8185C61ED968@nist.gov>
References: <20161109160754.21962.qmail@ary.lan>
In-Reply-To: <20161109160754.21962.qmail@ary.lan>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=simson.garfinkel@nist.gov;
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-originating-ip: [129.6.84.113]
x-ld-processed: 2ab5d82f-d8fa-4797-a93e-054655c61dec,ExtAddr
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM2PR09MB0574; 7:d2Qd4s6B0GyZL53zbI69+BFzXzM77QpHYclTm4E3PzvfkuZOVv2PZi4z2cZVTDdxhwXB0o5+/yPLnTw2rXBc9YyH0U1MolGsLuSxdUBhaFaRXsZFekai6b/hJL8fiM7fplkO5VgjhSwWlDkxLGvjvq5OR1B7K7V859r0YgYZU1sDSmE/yadH0BiMHzSjPi94e7WNavCZtamnJ3WecfqdWi20f+eGz/L5Z79zSqdrGGCxqn06CJKPZPmpX66vHspc+XwGeHCP8P3lcYkMggkke6b/5GPTzFYfN7FHbjejDYpDdgV6z2bGYDpsB1xzhtf1x806j0iq4+WmwyhYddTWDNM1m2cKbz+W6rcwKPWtaU0=
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: a2d29ac4-b4e5-4ee8-62ed-08d40ef3ab62
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(22001);SRVR:DM2PR09MB0574;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM2PR09MB057435F09CCD6BB5EB8BDE60F6B10@DM2PR09MB0574.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040281)(6060326)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3002001)(6055026)(6061324)(6041223); SRVR:DM2PR09MB0574; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM2PR09MB0574;
x-forefront-prvs: 01294F875B
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(7916002)(377454003)(189002)(199003)(24454002)(2900100001)(66066001)(6506003)(229853002)(50986999)(6512003)(77096005)(76176999)(7736002)(305945005)(7846002)(33656002)(81156014)(3280700002)(8936002)(106116001)(57306001)(92566002)(99286002)(105586002)(106356001)(50226002)(8676002)(81166006)(68736007)(2906002)(102836003)(82746002)(4326007)(6116002)(3846002)(97736004)(3660700001)(101416001)(83716003)(230783001)(87936001)(36756003)(122556002)(2950100002)(6916009)(86362001)(110136003)(5660300001)(189998001)(104396002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM2PR09MB0574; H:DM2PR09MB0576.namprd09.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: nist.gov does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <8F082E22E9C0944286F78BEF9D161EAE@namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: nist.gov
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 17 Nov 2016 14:11:48.0165 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 2ab5d82f-d8fa-4797-a93e-054655c61dec
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR09MB0574
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dane/1LQGO2TQ6QeVVfANjSiH9bydxPI>
Cc: "paul@nohats.ca" <paul@nohats.ca>, "dane@ietf.org" <dane@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dane] Second WGLC draft-ietf-dane-smime
X-BeenThere: dane@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS-based Authentication of Named Entities <dane.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dane>, <mailto:dane-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dane/>
List-Post: <mailto:dane@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dane-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane>, <mailto:dane-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 14:11:52 -0000

John,

Thanks for your comment.  It’s an important concern that you have raised.

In your scenario below, you write “if I publish a S/MIME certificate…”

Can you tell me how you would publish that S/MIME certificate, how people would find it, and why it would be believed?

The document essentially delegates the creation of S/MIME certs to the domain holders. If your domain holder is the kind of domain holder that would engage in an easy-detectable MITM attack such as you describe below, then why are you using them as your email provider?

I’m sure I’m missing something here…  It’s clear that distributing public key certificates is a fundamental problem with the PKI concept. How would solve it such that individuals could obtain certificates for people with whom they have had no previous contact?

Regards,

Simson 


> On Nov 9, 2016, at 11:07 AM, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> 
>> If you use gmail.com, you are at the mercy of google - whether encrypted
>> or not. those users have already given control away to google. This
>> document is not the right place to warn them about that.
> 
> As it stands now, your first sentence is just wrong.  Currently, if I
> publish a S/MIME certificate for my gmail address, and people encrypt
> mail using it, Google can't read my mail.  They can throw it away of
> course, but if it shows up in my mailbox, only I can read it.  In the
> other direction, only I can sign mail with my cert, and Google can't
> pretend to be me in an S/MIME context.  This assumes that CAs that
> sign S/MIME certs are competent enough to check that it's me asking
> them to sign, which I realize is kind of optimistic, but what I've
> laid out is the way that S/MIME is supposed to work.
> 
> This document flips that situation around so now gmail can publish
> MITM certs for all its users whether they like it or not.  That is a
> big change.
> 
> R's,
> John
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dane mailing list
> dane@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane