Re: Security for various IETF services

Spencer Dawkins <> Mon, 07 April 2014 14:13 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0249A1A0449; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 07:13:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rXdsfa332s91; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 07:13:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22f]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4E691A0431; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 07:13:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id uy5so6554377obc.6 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 07 Apr 2014 07:13:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Fq/BhaxJcKqV4EvcFRn+n1dqRwPYCoRFSKSByrnhI5o=; b=aXDSRqgv0EjdWR9jIviTH27McM18dHATZrGwWmTf7SqPmQrWiuRtyuQ6YugDPJuM8h ubJo8cB0omcB3uCZOoHZ4kWdbRYT3G1CuWS3K3AfuvrVuZOZh5ucTbpjRKZLzSZVfxqG HF6W+Nj0qiO1cJWmknBkE+wddMeO+LW7ZZgq+a+yRSsSBi9ERVHukkk9tz0Mp3HCQlEb GK2PEG0XjQCPEbzjzloNh5MVcpUbH/wwsJP/2ihT0Qt8VJiPyv4c9CLQIBsRpqk0Vk+d Lxbh5vg612wD+a0+D6+OMKOok8oo1S9G1LUBI4cx6gKqwxUBRkFN3nJkr0lCoQIKlmTk 4sEg==
X-Received: by with SMTP id wz4mr35506486oeb.30.1396879981218; Mon, 07 Apr 2014 07:13:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id dh8sm76912274oeb.10.2014. for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 07 Apr 2014 07:13:00 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 09:12:59 -0500
From: Spencer Dawkins <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ted Lemon <>, Stephen Farrell <>
Subject: Re: Security for various IETF services
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Stewart Bryant <>, Tim Bray <>, IETF-Discussion <>, The IESG <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 14:13:14 -0000

On 04/07/2014 08:03 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Apr 7, 2014, at 7:01 AM, Stephen Farrell <> wrote:
>> Yes, we ought move away from passwords if/when we ever find an
>> acceptably better solution, and yes, people ought manage their
>> passwords well, but neither are today's reality more's the pity.
> Perhaps it would be worth setting up support for client certs as a way to log in to IETF services.   If we won't start, why would someone else?

(Speaking as 1/15th, but only 1/15th, of the IESG that's asking for 
community input on this topic)

For me, "If we won't start, why would someone else?" was a significant 
consideration. I'm not locked in on any particular path, but I thought 
it was useful to ask about this was that if the IETF can't make an 
improved security environment work, that's not a good sign 

We can spin up new working groups to address problems we encounter. Most 
communities seeking to improve their security environment can't do that.

So, from my own perspective, on-by-default would be sufficient to find 
out what I'd like to find out ... but I'd love to find out at least part 
of what we'd like to know, in a post-Snowdon world.

We could find out something, without making Stewart run a 
state-of-the-art secure environment on his IoT device to FTP Internet