Re: [Emu] Issue 47 Certificate identity checks

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Mon, 12 April 2021 19:30 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.com>
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 22C463A14D2 for <emu@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:30:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 BuMc_SbplZgA for <emu@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:30:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-2.cisco.com (aer-iport-2.cisco.com [173.38.203.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFE823A1418 for <emu@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:30:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5874; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1618255809; x=1619465409; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc: to:references; bh=rRg6fU/XSAAV7L++dL0lLuyjEtqGSp0NeguGEUUBeMA=; b=CygLyTkxh7faGmOfgWrJhb8PmSfPQVOv9pZrNgZPbyiU4I/V7akwuZ/W NQK6/3AOHK60U9G79rEvPIpmxISyEaFhG0hdWrhdEOdmVI3laemf/gdVb b/QRTilkBmv4/8lTxivvr51di4KZJA3cIKSpqxVLi+9BZ25qbm5ykmN7t Q=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 484
X-IPAS-Result: A0D+AABgn3RglxbLJq1RCRwBAQEBAQEHAQESAQEEBAEBghKBI4JVAScSMYRCiQSIMyiHeoxLiCAEBwEBAQoDAQE0BAEBhFACgXomOBMCAwEBAQMCAwEBAQEBBQEBAQIBBgQUAQEBAQEBAQFohV2GRAEBAQECASNWBQsLDgonAwICRhEGE4JxAYJmIawCd4EygQGEWIRoEIE5gVOFKgGGT0OCC4E6DBCCMC8+hBaDQzWCKwSCRYEDWZMvjG6dAoMVgz6BRZd5BB+UK5BGtD2EAQIEBgUCFoFrIYFbMxoIGxVlAYI+PhIZDo44jjI/Ay84AgYBCQEBAwmNEQEB
IronPort-HdrOrdr: A9a23:xTaEVajKjo3UI+1Lql+BUEVaknBQXikji2hD6mlwRA09T+Wzkc eykPMHkSLlkTp5YgBCpfmsMLSNKEmxybdb+o8UVI3NYCDDtHGzJI9vqavuqgeOJwTE+uRQ1b htfsFFYbWaZzVHpPzn6wq1GctI+rm62Z2v7N2+815dCStwbaYlwwBnYzzrcDwSNW02YqYRJd 67+tdNoSamdDAxaMm2b0N1JtTrlpnsiI/sZwIACloczDS2yRms6LL8DnGjr3Ejbw8=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.82,216,1613433600"; d="asc'?scan'208,217";a="34982353"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-3.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 12 Apr 2021 19:30:07 +0000
Received: from [10.61.144.116] ([10.61.144.116]) by aer-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 13CJU6vl030763 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 12 Apr 2021 19:30:06 GMT
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <BFAD497A-105D-4646-9E21-D7C796667262@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B26438DD-62BA-4C99-97FF-BBDC5581C379"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.60.0.2.21\))
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 21:30:05 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAOgPGoBWdKAADbLSJRzaUzsD=0hyKvSNpyk7d9ZZXSHiQTSM4w@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>, EMU WG <emu@ietf.org>
To: Joseph Salowey <joe@salowey.net>
References: <CAOgPGoArm2RdEN4V-L9XEUvOeG0Vs+58Zj_p3Y2yRY0aYsVV_A@mail.gmail.com> <98456329-CE85-4BB2-B93F-74776FEBA299@cisco.com> <CE04DDF5-2605-4C2D-9E95-6C1DEDA478B8@deployingradius.com> <BEE48F72-7167-47C8-B4C6-7A486E2A05A0@cisco.com> <CAOgPGoBWdKAADbLSJRzaUzsD=0hyKvSNpyk7d9ZZXSHiQTSM4w@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.60.0.2.21)
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 10.61.144.116, [10.61.144.116]
X-Outbound-Node: aer-core-3.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emu/fuTT8ZYctK_xbOBIuhV-ebcjy2o>
Subject: Re: [Emu] Issue 47 Certificate identity checks
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, 12 Apr 2021 19:30:25 -0000


> On 12 Apr 2021, at 18:25, Joseph Salowey <joe@salowey.net <mailto:joe@salowey.net>> wrote:
> 
>> 
>>  I would agure there that the federation should have it's own CA.
> 
> That’s what I’m thinking.  But I could imagine hardcoded devices that make use of it.  That’s all.
> 
> 
> [Joe] Relying on a burned in certificate this way seems like a really bad idea.  What happens when that certificate expires?
> 

Separate the cert from the cert selection.  Don’t burn the cert in, but imagine a device that communicates out of the box with a federation service.  This is already done at higher layers.

Eliot