Re: [dane] On the PKIX-TA / PKIX-CA question? [ One week WGLC ]

Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com> Tue, 10 December 2013 15:17 UTC

Return-Path: <kent@bbn.com>
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 1597A1AE0CF for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 07:17:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 RfMAXvjWBHzH for <dane@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 07:17:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.bbn.com (smtp.bbn.com [128.33.0.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39EBA1ADF8B for <dane@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 07:17:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp89-089-218.bbn.com ([128.89.89.218]:51539) by smtp.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <kent@bbn.com>) id 1VqP3c-000Mnu-UR for dane@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:17:08 -0500
Message-ID: <52A73074.1050904@bbn.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:17:08 -0500
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dane@ietf.org
References: <A06891E1-01E0-40CC-A9A2-171CAA39AB79@kumari.net> <20131205175314.GH761@mournblade.imrryr.org> <E78C07CA-B742-43B2-8848-33DEB22A8014@kumari.net> <201312080234.rB82YeoW029387@new.toad.com> <m3y53tg0c3.fsf@carbon.jhcloos.org> <20131209231919.GY761@mournblade.imrryr.org> <4FAF6906-D258-4AB3-B76C-888C35566097@kirei.se> <20131210073402.GA761@mournblade.imrryr.org> <CABrd9SSSPFOe7HGyFiH=8oP=cvQ-g6HEqBytY8h=bbVonwNR7w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABrd9SSSPFOe7HGyFiH=8oP=cvQ-g6HEqBytY8h=bbVonwNR7w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dane] On the PKIX-TA / PKIX-CA question? [ One week WGLC ]
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: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 15:17:16 -0000

Ben,
> ...
>
> I'm willing to consider it. But I'm still concerned that without 
> something akin to CT, DANE is more dangerous than the existing PKI.
>
Can you elaborate, without reference to CY :-)? DANE seems preferable 
because the DNS hierarchy constrains the range of names that a node may 
assert (validly), unlike the WebPKI model.

Steve