Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-tls-external-psk-importer-05

alissa@cooperw.in Tue, 05 January 2021 18:10 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97F683A109B; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 10:10:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.12
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.12 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=njsk4A5u; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Az1D35fD
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 ZJgNDywyHWbA; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 10:10:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EE123A10B3; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 10:10:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BED75C0056; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 13:10:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: from imap37 ([10.202.2.87]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 05 Jan 2021 13:10:45 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to:cc :subject:content-type; s=fm2; bh=OPll32q9V+a2DVMkd/V3OsvCQTzlZXL EMBllt5rp8Vk=; b=njsk4A5u/4DMCbwy+Kg7ZegXsIBsaSpfW+RZEgokZIP+C+I nI+QQcvWo+AmPK2gzdCmvLtPE5PJGEEsYoMKBgzOfo1aJxCWFa9IXnYqtwRPxxbx ol2kNBS0TEXulR47czJ7hXLC6S6K+i0v9gQOM2SNMz3DyPxDXzPUy+4oHmR7yVP7 P91WgME3Aip/jMJ147UTJDris63VTw066zvt9mKXkB/OgvTUeo8xNpFv1RI6SUbF 3G/iqjcsHDHX8q7tKQ0//OTV+mWjfnwYWToodS1Es6MSoAEKYwmXwLJs5V9k5adk e+fIE7Stk6Mw//t50XGwb/r0a/zzU9EZ1wyhiOQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=OPll32 q9V+a2DVMkd/V3OsvCQTzlZXLEMBllt5rp8Vk=; b=Az1D35fDKg8Nh+4yD7KrnG 4PKf35/BlM+DrTBCqVNa7zlqhc6nm7yg7bLZKBNB9sC9hT/kRc86zspBoGoja60G FNFpEtI+RLfd2PB0AuAu1lB/sJIBgEL3Zpm/ax70z1P35mwnKiskQNvg1KPKMLsA Y/qEwtXa/rrkZOdkuTu8AL9orW/MA+fAJx3Rydxx0beu9OaKXLJ4jg88DHIY8c97 EhgUvgSKp1s2ODxbTBbu/K4CifvCSoRdDGvBaO1VfAWZ4m35F0kkaF8P0vtwYEya OFB7YD4clkNwnjX8o9tNqGdhB0xLjAlg5KzwvKrLExGBkYnG/WIt7h3RTaw/FJbg ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:pKv0X6Cq5D1cSIkkn6VFUL9Ava0gke8GFaLWJLEKcm2GFvHckJzOPA> <xme:pKv0X0iCHh-rTj5VJWSmLQiI8lV47Z7jW4RhthOaGY7eCdBs_xUvOX4tyhdAaieJt MWKmiGlOGgQP8iiKg>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedrvdefjedgjeefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreerjeenucfhrhhomheprghlihhs shgrsegtohhophgvrhifrdhinhenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeetieetleefgeehfeeite dvuefggefhuedtveehuedtjeegudeltddtheeuueevueenucffohhmrghinhepihgvthhf rdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomh eprghlihhsshgrsegtohhophgvrhifrdhinh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:pKv0X9mAyioISRmvz_YOOht2dTpmGc_3FUnTfFojyJTMtYcuknp28Q> <xmx:pKv0X4w-62KCap4RSC-WhrsbaXtSUVdguq9Qn-k4-a6-7vV-6kK6MQ> <xmx:pKv0X_Qtr8V9gdjSqp7y5QH1JBcFKnvHqbVuV729NFDQAc61UJmnCw> <xmx:pav0X6eFLjZjiDlCd4GasBtgdMOtgwJHZxPlL2qKsqA1tx7mtdcQEg>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 4BB7D190007C; Tue, 5 Jan 2021 13:10:45 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.3.1-61-gb52c239-fm-20201210.001-gb52c2396
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <48092ba7-e448-449d-9a43-820ad3f19b41@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1cd15f9c-128c-a6d1-57bd-3a38d05c71b9@gmail.com>
References: <160203748311.30970.1068662766302884172@ietfa.amsl.com> <1cd15f9c-128c-a6d1-57bd-3a38d05c71b9@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2021 13:10:24 -0500
From: alissa@cooperw.in
To: "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: last-call@ietf.org, tls@ietf.org, draft-ietf-tls-external-psk-importer.all@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/YaKJamv97xAQN8TpFvAPtqo4qRc>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] =?utf-8?q?Genart_last_call_review_of_draft-ietf-tls-ex?= =?utf-8?q?ternal-psk-importer-05?=
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2021 18:10:52 -0000

Brian, thanks for your review. Authors, thanks for your responses. I entered a No Objection ballot.

Alissa

On Thu, Dec 3, 2020, at 4:29 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> FYI, the -06 draft satisfies all my concerns.
> 
> Thanks
>    Brian Carpenter
> 
> On 07-Oct-20 15:24, Brian Carpenter via Datatracker wrote:
> > Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
> > Review result: Ready with Issues
> > 
> > Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-tls-external-psk-importer-05
> > 
> > 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
> > <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> > 
> > Document: draft-ietf-tls-external-psk-importer-05
> > Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
> > Review Date: 2020-10-07
> > IETF LC End Date: 2020-10-15
> > IESG Telechat date:  
> > 
> > Summary: Ready with issues
> > --------
> > 
> > Issues:
> > -------
> > 
> >> 1.  Introduction
> >>
> >>    Applications SHOULD provision separate PSKs for TLS 1.3 and prior
> >>    versions when possible.
> > 
> > I think that "when possible" could easily be used as a loophole by a
> > lazy implementer. ("Impossible, because I'd have to refactor my code.")
> > Since presumably this rule is to avoid all risk of a "related output"
> > cryptanalytic vulnerability, why weaken the RFC2119 definition of SHOULD?
> > The formal definition of SHOULD is stronger, with "the full implications
> > must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different
> > course." So I suggest simply deleting "when possible".
> > 
> >> 6.  Incremental Deployment
> >>
> >>   Recall that TLS 1.2 permits computing the TLS PRF with any hash
> >>   algorithm and PSK.  Thus, an EPSK may be used with the same KDF (and
> >>   underlying HMAC hash algorithm) as TLS 1.3 with importers.  However,
> >>   critically, the derived PSK will not be the same since the importer
> >>   differentiates the PSK via the identity and target KDF and protocol.
> >>   Thus, PSKs imported for TLS 1.3 are distinct from those used in TLS
> >>   1.2, and thereby avoid cross-protocol collisions.  Note that this
> >>   does not preclude endpoints from using non-imported PSKs for TLS 1.2.
> >>   Indeed, this is necessary for incremental deployment.
> > 
> > I read this three times and I have to ask whether "TLS 1.2" is
> > really what you want in the penultimate line.
> > 
> > Nits:
> > -----
> > 
> >> 4.1.  External PSK Diversification
> > ...
> >>   ImportedIdentity.target_protocol MUST be the (D)TLS protocol version
> >>   for which the PSK is being imported.  For example, TLS 1.3 [RFC8446]
> >>   and QUICv1 [QUIC] use 0x0304. 
> > 
> > As far as I can tell, [QUIC] doesn't specify this, but draft-ietf-quic-tls
> > does specify that QUICv1 uses TLS1.3. So the phrasing is a bit misleading.
> > Maybe:
> > 
> >   For example, TLS 1.3 [RFC8446] uses 0x0304, which will therefore also be
> >   used by QUICv1 [QUIC-TLS]. 
> > 
> > Are all the RFC2119 terms capitalised when required? For example, there
> > are lower case 'may' and 'must' in the last paragraph of section 4.1
> > (External PSK Diversification). I couldn't determine whether they were
> > intended to be normative.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gen-art mailing list
> > Gen-art@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
>