Re: [dtn] AD review of draft-ietf-dtn-bpsec-default-sc-02

Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com> Wed, 12 May 2021 21:26 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dtn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dtn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C1C23A1658 for <dtn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 May 2021 14:26:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 SoWiJh6xR2jK for <dtn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 May 2021 14:26:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-il1-x133.google.com (mail-il1-x133.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C1393A29D6 for <dtn@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 May 2021 14:17:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-il1-x133.google.com with SMTP id j12so21394329ils.4 for <dtn@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 May 2021 14:17:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=t7x6F0PXnR904Yn8D0ccYFgYcWyhi/TAqLTGjwB3ziA=; b=nWsyxy+2EtuMD6Pe5AxScl1CA1fIJLcRLSglOU0CaCzLzmffSmb5rKsgGmSPlo56qM FpfUcLpzRdD/x243iU20+Zzki5o4Ty5kF/FpWuIjNWBxxibEITPt8rL/8+OG94YUpGz7 dHEBC1at90J4e0tzsQigGzs8ifU7//Q29BzWDxDRw+ol/A5Udz7ex27a/w150STUdTzw tm8qzGpCB1tOuJEcBqC4c27P3eWf5hxTzGFhXM7WwUyjegXlGdoBOtKduJeMrjiRjnII rdLWOtsCMWU9TLmz9lsOtXbsHOa5y/Q+uai4LlSrySJ/Rx4uUSkZlw1kQZ5NtWfoaVzj T3ag==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=t7x6F0PXnR904Yn8D0ccYFgYcWyhi/TAqLTGjwB3ziA=; b=lQu9FUpbSjWnOwzQmSJZLcQwNvElBvmU5C+1kkKtZduJXs5I/6ELSOF8/xl1rqBH9T 2AYlLltmXJ5Bpn/qb+hhRYlBzw05iNngIvyaCbJ7jMjvlbsY+/MrYV0atwTf4DVKLykb ZOhZlmEl8AjhprVqQImLmOu2XlMps1WV5ICFjuSdBjKmbxVjtqQ3Hzc6FBn2azX4iIsO LnVT1PjZsuZCrlRsEVy3hSVsNyDeDI71EB7i3pQCLrZcJlPEVbY+V2OsuSaBs++cFmi/ hekIM8PTq/i8uSbQWlSNqUHx8C1DyUpMmZEKQ/RzplyHPp8HnJgI8cZeeq9La1/VLEyT ODLg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531QRjpI/1JahA3abOvGFPp58K80KAsqyca2BK4fcFfewN6Hbnt/ SecL1lplEq3jFpbnYP28Dh3SY+BwR7bq9YptSiOTx1yIsFlq8w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyNeYF6AQ0VN1C/lkBcXPrQINoW24ZUd9DnQN+fooN1Ye0R3pkpBocaqhIeD/tGltRD71CCtiq+oYPTMj4zuy0=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:1b85:: with SMTP id h5mr5179142ili.303.1620854268193; Wed, 12 May 2021 14:17:48 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 14:17:38 -0700
Message-ID: <CAM4esxRUTi+iLki95x6gRzaN7KfXr72bicKRrLxf=3_No8-PSQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: dtn@ietf.org
Cc: Zaheduzzaman Sarker <zaheduzzaman.sarker@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e36fac05c2288a20"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtn/_iDTae783q9TVPcWiosMORppXEE>
Subject: Re: [dtn] AD review of draft-ietf-dtn-bpsec-default-sc-02
X-BeenThere: dtn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Delay Tolerant Networking \(DTN\) discussion list at the IETF." <dtn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dtn>, <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dtn/>
List-Post: <mailto:dtn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn>, <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 21:26:12 -0000

Hello DTN,

As Zahed is still on medical leave, I have conducted a partial review of
draft-ietf-dtn-bpsec-default-sc-06 to check that it fully complies with the
outcome of his AD review. I apologize for any errors due to my insufficient
context -- I have not read the entire draft yet.

(3.3.2) I appreciate the new Key Management section, but I don't want to
lose part of Zahed's original review -- does the key wrapping [AES-KW]
include enough metadata that the receiver can select the correct cipher and
key to use without having to do trial decryption?

(3.3.3) IMO the discussion about a registry for Integrity Scope Flags
petered out with a clear resolution -- are the authors of the opinion that
use of more of these flags is simply inconceivable? A registry would
provide guidelines for how to assign more of these in future.

(4.1) In item (3), it states "The use of the Galois/Counter Mode produces
cipher-text with the
       same size as the plain text". My understanding of GCM is that there
is a 128 or 256 bit authentication tag appended to it that makes the whole
of the cipher text larger than the plaintext.  Is this a semantic thing, am
I wrong, or are you wrong?

(6.1) I fear that you successfully scrubbed sc-02 for lower-case normative
words, but then added new stuff here. Specifically:

"must be able to perform the following activities"

"This may include pre-sharing of key encryption keys"

Please verify that these should not be capitalized.

Regards,
Martin