Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-core-object-security-08

["Joel M. Halpern" <[e-mail]>]

Yes, that is what I was looking for.
Thank you,
Joel

On 2/23/18 9:38 AM, Göran Selander wrote:
> 
> How about this (see the last and third to last edit):
> https://github.com/core-wg/oscoap/commit/8f277d83
> 
> where the reference is made to COSE instead of AEAD?
> 
> Best
> Göran
> 
> 
> On 2018-02-23 15:32, "Joel Halpern Direct" <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> 
>> I guess it is up to you.  Personally, I like the idea of the verify
>> description including some reference to how one actually does verify.
>> I will leave it to the authors and WG to decide what degree of clarity
>> is called for here.
>>
>> Yours,
>> Joel
>>
>> On 2/23/18 9:30 AM, Göran Selander wrote:
>>> Hi Joel,
>>>
>>> Thanks for quick feedback, inline.
>>>
>>> On 2018-02-23 14:59, "Joel M. Halpern" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In terms of my concerns, if Step 7 said "Verify and Decrypt the COSE
>>>> object using the Recipient Key as per RFC 5116 Section 2.2" that would
>>>> fill in the confusion for this reader.
>>>
>>> Since the AEAD is used throughout the draft, in particular in other
>>> parts
>>> of this section I’m thinking that maybe we should add RFC 5116 to the
>>> list
>>> of specifications following "Readers are expected to be familiar with”
>>> in
>>> Section 1.1. Would that address your comment?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Göran
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yours,
>>>> Joel
>>>>
>>>> On 2/23/18 5:26 AM, Göran Selander wrote:
>>>>> Hi Joel,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your review. Comments inline.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2018-02-22 04:51, "Joel Halpern" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Reviewer: Joel Halpern
>>>>>> Review result: Ready with Nits
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
>>>>>> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
>>>>>> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
>>>>>> like any other last call comments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Document: draft-ietf-core-object-security-08
>>>>>> Reviewer: Joel Halpern
>>>>>> Review Date: 2018-02-21
>>>>>> IETF LC End Date: 2018-03-02
>>>>>> IESG Telechat date: 2018-03-08
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Summary: This document is ready for publication as a Proposed
>>>>>> Standard
>>>>>> RFC
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Major issues: N/A
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Minor issues:
>>>>>>       In section 8.2 on verifying the request, step 5 says to
>>>>>> "compose"
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>       Additional Authentication Data.  I would have expected it to be
>>>>>> "verify"
>>>>>>       the Additional Authentication Data.  I could imagine that the
>>>>>> verification
>>>>>>       consists of composing what it should be, and then comparing with
>>>>>> what
>>>>>> is
>>>>>>       received.  But I do not see the comparison step.  is it
>>>>>> implicit in
>>>>>> some
>>>>>>       other step?  This occurs again in 8.4, so I presume I am simply
>>>>>> missing
>>>>>>       something.  This may suggest some clarification could be useful.
>>>>>
>>>>> The AAD is indeed “composed" both on encrypting and decrypting side
>>>>> from
>>>>> data which needs to be known to the endpoint at the time when the AEAD
>>>>> operation is performed. The authenticated decryption process is
>>>>> described
>>>>> in:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5116#section-2.2
>>>>>
>>>>> So the verification consists of feeding the input, including the AAD,
>>>>> to
>>>>> the authenticated decryption which calculates the plain text or FAIL,
>>>>> and
>>>>> a failure may be - but is not necessarily - caused by wrong AAD.
>>>>>
>>>>> The AD review also indicated that we should move the reference to RFC
>>>>> 5116
>>>>> to an early section in the draft and that change is already included
>>>>> in
>>>>> the latest version on the CoRE WG Github.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards
>>>>> Göran
>>>>>
>>>
>