[humanresolv] Trying to open discussion

"Pars Mutaf" <pars.mutaf@gmail.com> Thu, 20 March 2008 17:52 UTC

Return-Path: <humanresolvers-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-humanresolvers-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-humanresolvers-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BCD228C73D; Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.645
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.645 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.208, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ggVv5ZOlj4dk; Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:51:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost []) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 667F628C636; Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:51:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: humanresolvers@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: humanresolvers@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0232D28C59E for <humanresolvers@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:51:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I1WH84ZW0KDT for <humanresolvers@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com (wx-out-0506.google.com []) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DC6D28C636 for <humanresolvers@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i26so1171364wxd.31 for <humanresolvers@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; bh=l5cipH9UlCtmcHbxQVh1E8K08vPrWq1ZsaGX48xQINc=; b=hw80yVvFJdqBth5dtjgcvZNNySkZHcGBqfA/ZAO6P7yG1WINwCVxKBIWp7TExQ+8OVxdH6sN7czllrl1NF26DRgoKEanixwRTgHCeL8sB1e8Xe298vesGWhEvZ+1tbpnLjsgcrDbx2VfkRkX785nEeC4LXFfAxLlr1ATWHFmcQQ=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=fdutnMQ4UEYJALabXXhaGocb1KUY1O6Z3+I6dxxHOFn4/5BccBKGGASzR67V6FJaRnh8BCu9JSbgSrklQ+OX65YW9XqpBycnc0C5lI3bm+klPWwNXomuhlrrxxEogkQ7+bZY22ArXLgieysbOr5Rr5LsOvmhBJtn8x0V35dDOd4=
Received: by with SMTP id n17mr2921816wxc.17.1206035367281; Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:49:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <18a603a60803201049g3885dd57uef46dc2d2466a053@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 19:49:27 +0200
From: Pars Mutaf <pars.mutaf@gmail.com>
To: humanresolvers@ietf.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Subject: [humanresolv] Trying to open discussion
X-BeenThere: humanresolvers@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Pairing cellular hosts <humanresolvers.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/humanresolvers>, <mailto:humanresolvers-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/humanresolvers>
List-Post: <mailto:humanresolvers@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:humanresolvers-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/humanresolvers>, <mailto:humanresolvers-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: humanresolvers-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: humanresolvers-bounces@ietf.org

Hello humanresolvers,

Hoping that this ML is not my personal IETF blog ;-)
I would like to ask your opinion on the following idea.

Pairing protocol (basic)

What it does?

1. Mutual authentication using [SAS].
2. Sign each other's certificate.
3. Exchange SIP URIs.
4. Exchange Mobile IPv6 home addresses and other information.

What is the outcome?

1. IPsec or TSL can be used.
2. No need to use SIP triangle nor trapezoid.
	->More reliable
        ->Faster connection establishment.

[SAS] Vaudenay, S., "Secure Communications over Insecure
      Channels Based on Short Authenticated Strings", Advances
      in Cryptology, CRYPTO 2005.

Review of [SAS]:
One user tells (i.e. orally) to the other a short auth
string and their phone get mutually authenticated. The
contribution of [SAS] is that it shortens and simplifies very
much the authentication string. 15-20 bits are enough. The
general belief is that the pairing problem was solved
by this paper.
humanresolvers mailing list