Re: [Emu] POST WGLC Comments draft-ietf-emu-eap-tls13

Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com> Wed, 18 September 2019 13:07 UTC

Return-Path: <aland@deployingradius.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 62C83120088; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 06:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 VWDDHEwUxcbC; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 06:07:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.networkradius.com (mail.networkradius.com [62.210.147.122]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB61B120044; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 06:07:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.20.55] (ottawa.ca.networkradius.com [72.137.155.194]) by mail.networkradius.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CCF5E1775; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:06:59 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: NetworkRADIUS; dmarc=none header.from=deployingradius.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
From: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
In-Reply-To: <CY4PR1101MB22781AB8C8982ACF99B61544DB8E0@CY4PR1101MB2278.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 09:06:58 -0400
Cc: John Mattsson <john.mattsson@ericsson.com>, "draft-ietf-emu-eap-tls13@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-emu-eap-tls13@ietf.org>, EMU WG <emu@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DAE24683-2B66-40F1-AFC6-77250113B204@deployingradius.com>
References: <7828_1564869242_5D46027A_7828_348_1_02e001d54a45$e92ae900$bb80bb00$@augustcellars.com> <20b118932a4843b6b88e605799fafea8@aalto.fi> <211AD83C-D111-4EEB-AAF0-D9B5E521F4CF@deployingradius.com> <8F355C6F-DF1E-4E03-B75E-0F1D2508B9D4@ericsson.com> <246280B8-6E5C-484B-95BD-9C940C98C507@deployingradius.com> <CY4PR1101MB22781AB8C8982ACF99B61544DB8E0@CY4PR1101MB2278.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
To: "Owen Friel (ofriel)" <ofriel@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emu/h60zGGXdrYTmEZfeXno8TuuJbyI>
Subject: Re: [Emu] POST WGLC Comments draft-ietf-emu-eap-tls13
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: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:07:08 -0000

On Sep 18, 2019, at 8:45 AM, Owen Friel (ofriel) <ofriel@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>>  Which means that if PSK was allowed, the server can't look at the packets to
>> distinguish resumption from "raw" PSK.  Instead, the server has to look at it's
>> resumption cache which may be in a DB.
> 
> The server can use the PskIdentity in the PreSharedKeyExtension to differentiate between an offline PSK used for authentication vs. a PSK established via NewSessionTicket.

  Please define "use".  As an implementor, I can't implement "my code USES a field".  I need to know what the code *does* with it.

  How does the code differentiate between PSK identities?  Are the identity formats different?  If so, how and why?

  What prevents a malicious attacker from "using" a format which matches an identity coming from NewSessionTicket?

  My understanding is that the code *cannot* make any decisions simply by looking at the PSK identity field.  Instead, it has to look at the resumption cache to see if a given PSK matches a cached one.  Or maybe the code looks in a DB to see if the given PSK is a real "end-user" PSK in the DB.

  Simply waving your hands and saying it "uses" a field is unhelpful.  Please give substantive feedback and/or advice about what the code *does*.

  Alan DeKok.