Re: What ASN.1 got right

Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> Tue, 02 March 2021 20:49 UTC

Return-Path: <mike@fresheez.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 4808C3A105F for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 12:49:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mtcc.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 AgDAYjH9YgtH for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 12:49:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52e.google.com (mail-pg1-x52e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 132D73A105E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Mar 2021 12:49:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52e.google.com with SMTP id h4so14658482pgf.13 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Mar 2021 12:49:57 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mtcc.com; s=fluffulence; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=1CFyI8FWnfwIbhs87LXozMDJDTByW0wteLvMs/JVH8c=; b=TNgz2BoMySkY+Nx6oCz4rooG1SWHAgsBpp6+IXT2+Wp9+wY4Qq2ULU1aYvcRKmw+NS heQl8XXyrTfLy0LzR/hexnCS+16kYRsw8mIS7oApUzCx0GL6u8PuInpCUuV8Nl9XOaTm 3KbFaqRhAamjCq9BQhXgpAekgfztLthySYueIr8Hg0w69+NNCy3jJ2+LRQuDpibJ9/Jc 5xNIXsSdx4SWpRDENXwFTAgR69RrMuprd0isRBHoCe8/Ob4PtB381c48/EPmBzYfEais RzLdYt5Ry14OPs/5A9VXTUz1YgrnJT0Sp+cIuMxNAefGrtS0fbapoRCcfU1Ke15jKNlN WJog==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=1CFyI8FWnfwIbhs87LXozMDJDTByW0wteLvMs/JVH8c=; b=WeERZu/5f9NrWLQO69ogpVNyxd5GiMr7rK6o0TIDTdHQSckAREXLURUGTiRjzpYF/s 1md4JZWKr1QMZD724xtCLDxBN12ni6G1RM73SwK0XIbZ0ZgsKLJ8CwW7u2vGx2bIvcJd h8sX2i+Ape+LPJTROp0IGvFtoLfkT/P0zA8SnqfkVdqEkxXfTaC/5xMF+YI7TAefkWef LwH9aFcXnguBGk8dvjCd+8jlDftPPaVvzhHOZhU76JOdNOQTGhy68gCRqiPHm8eqZexH 0friOGKkD3UsqXJExSDqGFnONpVLCBp+bwMTufaszeacVO4zvWRT0lGSdfjSOBRpY1Ir pmdg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532JtExlqawAiuNQGUmfNFfmq4rFkIjnWOhup1qHS+Y8NyDE1xFp 7QgMG7pJIgNxh0mgUR5hL252SxGD9XfAig==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzNNxyWy0tvJn7wVGYpUGiXXIlBOdoSMpSJxMRv+yt3XUn+yDomkwDuS8VhSh6Da0cAHBALxw==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:225d:: with SMTP id t29mr19334217pgm.318.1614718196149; Tue, 02 Mar 2021 12:49:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mike-mac.lan ([206.107.197.192]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o129sm20391580pgo.27.2021.03.02.12.49.55 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Mar 2021 12:49:55 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: What ASN.1 got right
To: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
Cc: Dirk-Willem van Gulik <dirkx@webweaving.org>, ietf@ietf.org
References: <20210302010731.GL30153@localhost> <0632b948-9ed1-f2bd-96da-9922ebb2aa60@mtcc.com> <006750D4-B70D-44F8-A01A-BD3AB136D9D3@webweaving.org> <a584ff73-34ae-1c9e-e746-ce98749461d7@mtcc.com> <20210302183901.GV30153@localhost>
From: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>
Message-ID: <91c5d983-a729-d073-e138-e91184eed83d@mtcc.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2021 12:49:54 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210302183901.GV30153@localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/MidKHY_ibYUibMzj0e9kDX-7K28>
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: Tue, 02 Mar 2021 20:49:59 -0000

On 3/2/21 10:39 AM, Nico Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 10:19:53AM -0800, Michael Thomas wrote:
>>                                                     [...] And once you rely
>> on online crl's, it's all the same.
> Yes, well, wherever possible we should be using short-lived credentials
> and dispense with revocation.

Or just directly query the domain for the public key and turn it into a 
caching problem instead of a revocation problem. Caching has appeal 
because the TTL can be zero as needed.

Mike