IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dcrup] Review of draft-ietf-dcrup-dkim-crypto-03

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Fri, 07 July 2017 15:06 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: dcrup@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dcrup@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BFF9131627 for <dcrup@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 08:06:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.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 ZSqCWhzl3T1A for <dcrup@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 08:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (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 C6FB913160A for <dcrup@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 08:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050102.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050102.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id v67F4RWH021416; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 16:06:13 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=34WE6U1U3c62E6a4djeziG4Iw0cttksPR1FixdvdnqU=; b=dBVIfz+vqMAcB7OSDiH6oqFq5BdmNHF0qXGhHXM/5AYM/e4yODvKBF+X0zwCbDRYHLG3 lnYxeifU8xXVQ6nm6/+tr5p/7rVTgXAQLrVbVgrXVTdN8uW4sMlp6i1myHwYFkW9eLDw cHMkny6HMhSO/FqhiCpMFzkaUojyECPoU7+oMZ/ZG4uKoudFCfCO8RWX0FsfRWqgeXqa 2742k+f2/T2xxML3RkTG+DHgV5SLS67M6WRFhAreBUZBDizu/jvTY3ZuK+HIDQ4kPoMK AMZRz6nwQ/5PCdUBCHyZUor5hu8vPrylx5ggaTcihcfdkMw9Y9fLkgOhQgIy2z7uZr7G +w==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint1 (a184-51-33-18.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com [184.51.33.18] (may be forged)) by m0050102.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2bhjxwe1fm-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 07 Jul 2017 16:06:13 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v67F0vKq016254; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:06:12 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.32]) by prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2be72ug270-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 07 Jul 2017 11:06:12 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB5.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.105) by usma1ex-dag3mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.56) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1263.5; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 08:06:12 -0700
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb5.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.105) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1263.5; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:06:11 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1263.000; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:06:11 -0400
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "dcrup@ietf.org" <dcrup@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Dcrup] Review of draft-ietf-dcrup-dkim-crypto-03
Thread-Index: AQHS9s/65iHlD+jTJUCp9nqNsWi4aqJIdm4A
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 15:06:11 +0000
Message-ID: <6d4b76c9b42848f1b18c42ba22895993@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
References: <CABkgnnW8nnoRGKoJQ4STAcT6CXdWFRCpz0h20hw+ksfw1x0PGg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnW8nnoRGKoJQ4STAcT6CXdWFRCpz0h20hw+ksfw1x0PGg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.19.32.247]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-07-07_06:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1703280000 definitions=main-1707070249
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-07-07_07:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1703280000 definitions=main-1707070249
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dcrup/DlxP72eNpHfIuj78UklyQ3AxZe4>
Subject: Re: [Dcrup] Review of draft-ietf-dcrup-dkim-crypto-03
X-BeenThere: dcrup@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: DKIM Crypto Update <dcrup.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dcrup>, <mailto:dcrup-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dcrup/>
List-Post: <mailto:dcrup@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dcrup-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dcrup>, <mailto:dcrup-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 15:06:25 -0000

As an individual ...

> I think that Scott's draft does a much better job of the SHA-1 removal and
> attempting to do this all at once in this document isn't helping its clarity at all.

I assume you mean Scott Kitterman and not Scott Rose. :)  I think we should refer to documents by name to avoid the ambiguity (and keep in mind that these are WG documents, not individual authors's).

> On hashing here: hash everything.  Ed25519 might be the last algorithm that
> has a key that is this small.  Uniformity is more valuable than space here.

I disagree, and so far the WG seems to be leaning against this view.  We'll talk in Prague, of course, but right now the only voices for hashing are you and ekr.

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status