IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: What ASN.1 got right

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Wed, 03 March 2021 18:38 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78C103A1823 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 10:38:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cryptonector.com
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 C12ddaqb9HWT for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 10:38:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bumble.maple.relay.mailchannels.net (bumble.maple.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.214.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32C0E3A1821 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 10:38:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37737342EB1; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 18:38:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a55.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-16-25.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.16.25]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C5ABB342ECA; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 18:38:30 +0000 (UTC)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a55.g.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 100.96.16.25 (trex/6.0.2); Wed, 03 Mar 2021 18:38:31 +0000
X-MC-Relay: Neutral
X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost
X-Thoughtful-Cooing: 4f336ab23955df16_1614796711058_3978840179
X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1614796711058:899588266
X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1614796711058
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a55.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a55.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DC3E7EFA1; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 10:38:30 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=cryptonector.com; bh=w5iIA2Tf00j1fl GwggIdvKclLVU=; b=hspRENaRZpyMsIKtzQ7x1vEiRagG08r1gCec2A2crRZ0rq UGanaXkZ8gvopQJhnb8BKgfAWBiLoY+9WmPhkk7B1+BfhpDpe5RgcQVlcOuYJv6z jHtj+9jUE88gMofIlzjn3ws78TkIgNKBU1MoEca3d37SczOm2XjeHk9a8fUtA=
Received: from localhost (unknown [24.28.108.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a55.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5D50C7E395; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 10:38:27 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 12:38:24 -0600
X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a55
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>
Cc: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: What ASN.1 got right
Message-ID: <20210303183823.GJ30153@localhost>
References: <20210302234928.GX30153@localhost> <cb4960e2-05a1-9d28-f17b-9f610ac378c9@mtcc.com> <20210303002330.GZ30153@localhost> <7d70044c-88e8-0165-5ce3-4c8612965f16@mtcc.com> <20210303005136.GB30153@localhost> <8e4d3b84-0357-524e-b8f5-b8f7290adf2b@mtcc.com> <20210303022234.GE30153@localhost> <b87a101d-dcad-1f75-aeec-a2d19022ce35@mtcc.com> <20210303033555.GG30153@localhost> <370a2bd4-46b2-aad2-3ae2-31e92888a8a3@mtcc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <370a2bd4-46b2-aad2-3ae2-31e92888a8a3@mtcc.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/BbJSmxkoGqMFHJMwxqKkrjfUDRU>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 18:38:33 -0000

On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 09:50:30AM -0800, Michael Thomas wrote:
> Or you just expect online and not worry about any of this.

No, sorry.  I've explained.  We'll have to disagree.

> I'm not even sure why you'd want to use certs in your use case. You're just
> reinventing Kerberos.

Because we have a principal for a user, and also a trusted thing that
wants to impersonate them (in order to run the user's batch jobs) but
without the user having to delegate a credential to them.  So we issue
that thing a client certificate (that the user never sees) that can be
used to acquire a TGT on behalf of the user.  This isn't remotely like
reinventing Kerberos.

Nico
--

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email