IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dane] Feature creep for draft-ietf-dane-smime

Viktor Dukhovni <viktor1dane@dukhovni.org> Fri, 07 February 2014 19:49 UTC

Return-Path: <viktor1dane@dukhovni.org>
X-Original-To: dane@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dane@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7D321A0459 for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 11:49:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, J_CHICKENPOX_46=0.6] autolearn=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 V3_ZHgyWyPWQ for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 11:49:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mournblade.imrryr.org (mournblade.imrryr.org [38.117.134.19]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75E631A01D2 for <dane@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 11:49:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mournblade.imrryr.org (Postfix, from userid 1034) id 5D56A2AB245; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 19:49:33 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 19:49:33 +0000
From: Viktor Dukhovni <viktor1dane@dukhovni.org>
To: dane@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20140207194933.GS278@mournblade.imrryr.org>
References: <41938fd202ba460285b59132c29ac826@BY2PR09MB029.namprd09.prod.outlook.com> <20140206195322.GD278@mournblade.imrryr.org> <11698F58-B554-4CC8-872F-D2A3BF08986C@kirei.se> <20140206215742.GF278@mournblade.imrryr.org> <07a801cf23a1$a5b62c00$f1228400$@augustcellars.com> <E52467C0-3B6A-45D6-AFAB-6A103E587350@vpnc.org> <20140207020201.GJ278@mournblade.imrryr.org> <alpine.LFD.2.10.1402071258500.21252@bofh.nohats.ca> <20140207184155.GQ278@mournblade.imrryr.org> <66FEEA7D-D815-4536-A141-189F2CB705B9@vpnc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <66FEEA7D-D815-4536-A141-189F2CB705B9@vpnc.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: Re: [dane] Feature creep for draft-ietf-dane-smime
X-BeenThere: dane@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 19:49:35 -0000

On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 11:08:20AM -0800, Paul Hoffman wrote:

> Those existed 15 years ago, and still do. The proposal to make
> it slightly harder for a harvester (and that's all we're suggesting)
> adds complexity and no measurable value.

Yes, adding iterations would definitely add complexity.

Arguably HMAC(domain, localpart) is more complex than
SHA(localpart@domain), I don't care which is used.

Either way of computing the hash of the full address, rather than
just the local part adds no complexity, and makes off-line attacks
more difficult (per site dictionaries, rather than global dictionaries).
This is a free win.  There's simply no reason not to.

-- 
	Viktor.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email