[Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sip-dtls-srtp-framework-05.txt

Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> Wed, 05 November 2008 16:55 UTC

Return-Path: <gen-art-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: gen-art-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-gen-art-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D3943A67D9; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 08:55:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: gen-art@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3CBB3A67D9 for <gen-art@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 08:55:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.464
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.464 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.135, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jHMAvaMcn90R for <gen-art@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 08:55:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from imr2.ericy.com (imr2.ericy.com [198.24.6.3]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCCBC3A6858 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 08:55:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw750.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.50]) by imr2.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id mA5GtJJF015366; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 10:55:20 -0600
Received: from eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se ([138.85.77.53]) by eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 5 Nov 2008 10:55:19 -0600
Received: from [142.133.10.113] ([142.133.10.113]) by eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 5 Nov 2008 10:55:19 -0600
Message-ID: <4911CF93.5020400@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 11:53:39 -0500
From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080925)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-sip-dtls-srtp-framework@tools.ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Nov 2008 16:55:19.0272 (UTC) FILETIME=[48D2B680:01C93F67]
Cc: sip-ads@tools.ietf.org, sip-chairs@tools.ietf.org
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-sip-dtls-srtp-framework-05.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for
draft-ietf-sip-dtls-srtp-framework-05.txt

For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as Proposed 
Standard, but I have a few comments.

Substantial
===========

Section 8.1: Responder identity

When Bob does not respond with an UPDATE message, his identity is not 
integrity protected. The draft states that in such case, a MITM attacker 
may tamper with the fingerprint but Bob would be aware of this. It is 
not clear to me how Bob would be aware of this. Consider the scenario 
where an attacker Eve (who can attack both the signaling and media 
paths) has switched Bob's key fingerprint with hers. She can receive 
encrypted media coming from Alice, decrypt it for her own use and 
re-encrypt it for Bob and send it to him. How will Bob detect this 
tampering?

Minor
=====

* draft-ietf-avt-dtls-srtp-05 needs to become a Normative reference 
instead of an informative reference. Section 6.10 has the following text

"Implementations of this specification MUST support DTLS-SRTP"

making it impossible to implement this spec without implementing 
DTLS-SRTP. This will also lead to a downref that needs to be called out.

* Section 7: Call flow with STUN

"Message (6):  STUN connectivity-check response Bob -> Alice"

Bob is responding to Message 5 instead of Message 3 as stated in the 
text. Please replace.

Editorial
=========

* SBC (expand at first use) : Probably add reference to 
draft-ietf-sipping-sbc-funcs-07

* Section 6.10: s/less highly optimized/less optimized/

Typos
=====
Section 1 Para 4: s/sigaling/signaling/

Section 6.7.2: s/appopriate/appropriate/

Section 6.9 Title: s/Encryptions/Encryption/

Section 7 Para 3: s/especialy/especially/

Section 8.6 para 2: s/taht/that/

Appendix A.3. : s/Reusage/Reuse/

Appendix A.18. : s/Negotation/Negotiation/

Cheers
Suresh



_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art