IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Emu] [lamps] EAP/EMU recommendations for client cert validation logic

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 20 January 2020 17:22 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: emu@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: emu@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EEB61209AF; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 09:22:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 u66RudJSPwRK; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 09:22:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81C0E1209EC; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 09:22:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EA473897E; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 12:21:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6456C5F5; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 12:22:11 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: EMU WG <emu@ietf.org>, "spasm@ietf.org" <spasm@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <22430B86-2680-4E50-AF12-A200FD051E8D@deployingradius.com>
References: <B2989B0E-8B6B-4B7A-B871-AF520310B3FC@deployingradius.com> <CAErg=HG06ZpiRUYogiVwoJPsZDsjzAVvO0B4=K=PE7aAHe44rA@mail.gmail.com> <6CEB4C89-B749-4A65-A25A-A12830ED8A62@deployingradius.com> <CAErg=HFPCYKgUEXHaOC0sQECYaVmt0TZXe-uDrKzFiNSAcdckg@mail.gmail.com> <00453E78-D991-4B4D-A138-5788FACC47C2@deployingradius.com> <CAErg=HFYQpfqTE9==TzGo795ZiuNBGVMqWuXS6GJ2DV0nGxPzA@mail.gmail.com> <316CC74D-667B-4A1E-AD48-A702DF705423@deployingradius.com> <6191.1578513600@localhost> <CB67C090-4D6A-4586-AD7C-99A29EF5D92D@deployingradius.com> <CAOgPGoDADPY125Bf7mbPCpEVkwVF=YmbG9wAN0S-WyCWg27BCw@mail.gmail.com> <20200116040715.GC80030@kduck.mit.edu> <CAErg=HHwLOw9sL2=nGca5MuuyiV2Zghrp6prR7SqLJAvfCLmjA@mail.gmail.com> <B3A03277-C176-4E63-ADB3-70133E2ABA46@deployingradius.com> <MN2PR11MB3901D1B17802F2DACCC8966CDB300@MN2PR11MB3901.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAErg=HE0XDbhuibtky5VhvZYUnQxDitLSEuf4uzXnuByNQN+4Q@mail.gmail.com> <55CE7F32-B5DE-44F5-AE06-72BE12FA05FF@deployingradius.com> <CAErg=HH8L jqMR37Ek1uK12uCDj4N89Ot=Fm_PLOBdeXsv3sdpw@mail.gmail.com> <7F591857-4B7B-41BD-B101-6C40BE527644@deployingradius.com> <CAErg=HF9SQCmP9hi8SP-EstyYL-qVLWMeitP2AHc3T6ZWZM4vQ@mail.gmail.com> <9AADAAD6-0A66-4198-AFBF-DBC2D87DBFA0@deployingradius.com> <CAErg=HE8WO1oU=ZUxMeJZpxVyM_6ypCn-3_9UqKkMv44c7Do=Q@mail.gmail.com> <07C710A5-3B2A-4D15-8BB7-AB5A8B5EF5D1@deployingradius.com> <CAErg=HGf=3z+_S2f+_ciSunpi4W05aKxoxx=ozH9kXtooAJL9w@mail.gmail.com> <7C85D468-1D28-4C3A-BC3E-C42374933B51@deployingradius.com> <CAErg=HFM4=V1YjD2Z7Rd5cNsDv6v9oTwKcbaTwhDdrQvOwtS9w@mail.gmail.com> <5ED33CB8-4C56-4117-A001-C2EB056CA80B@deployingradius.com> <CAErg=HF2L-XSQExoKz71QcZMqJdA-gn3KxnZwT1qypzBA9Hi3Q@mail.gmail.com> <22430B86-2680-4E50-AF12-A200FD051E8D@deployingradius.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 12:22:11 -0500
Message-ID: <5879.1579540931@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emu/RQt_NjLVpsSYaE0x0UpnODElmN8>
Subject: Re: [Emu] [lamps] EAP/EMU recommendations for client cert validation logic
X-BeenThere: emu@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "EAP Methods Update \(EMU\)" <emu.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/emu>, <mailto:emu-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/emu/>
List-Post: <mailto:emu@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emu-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu>, <mailto:emu-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 17:22:17 -0000

Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com> wrote:
    > While, there are commercial supplicant products, these products are
    > overwhelmingly used by the enterprise, on computers owned by the
    > enterprise, and managed by the enterprise systems.  They have zero
    > impact on the average user.

Today.
But, since a goal here was for IoT devices, this changes things:

1) Enterprises want to manage IoT device onboarding, and they overwhelmingly
   want to use EAP/1x.

2) IoT devices don't have users and can't even load a non-standard XML
   configuration.

    > In practice, an SDO like the Wifi Alliance, 3G / 4G  / 5G groups can
    > demand their members put root CAs into devices.  That can even demand
    > that the CAs follow certain policies.

    > I have no such power.  So it's unhelpful to say "just start your own
    > CA!"

Well, even if you were the Wifi Alliance, you'd also have a mindshare/bootstrap problem.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email