[IPP] Fwd: [TLS] Consultation About Assignment of ExtensionTypes

Ira McDonald via ipp <ipp@pwg.org> Sat, 13 June 2020 20:01 UTC

Return-Path: <ipp-bounces@pwg.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-ipp-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ipp-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8ECA83A121E for <ietfarch-ipp-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 13:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, 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=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=gmail.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 llSWIBG9EJh1 for <ietfarch-ipp-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 13:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.pwg.org (mail.pwg.org [50.116.7.199]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBCD93A121D for <ipp-archive2@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 13:01:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail.pwg.org (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 4CEEE10F67; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 20:01:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.pwg.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail.pwg.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C88022622; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 20:01:14 +0000 (UTC)
X-Original-To: ipp@pwg.org
Delivered-To: ipp@pwg.org
Received: by mail.pwg.org (Postfix, from userid 1002) id B1B6B26EF; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 20:01:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ua1-x92c.google.com (mail-ua1-x92c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::92c]) by mail.pwg.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E05E22622 for <ipp@pwg.org>; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 20:01:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ua1-x92c.google.com with SMTP id r1so4359701uam.6 for <ipp@pwg.org>; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 13:01:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=aRmkhcMwYAqTO8vOV6/ngoOitJtK6B1FewPcD4KpoVc=; b=O5U7ppZ3Sw13Gi3JFR09GPupyahN2NNSNguJE7gbRYfHKftg9ca0/wYk+nQrYKque+ FYzsy9lJEz622Ea4a4Zkyq9/Xquq2ozI+bzRqZjukCpHfPboC7Xzjm14sjJTZbercumD 0leISbvi+7rrPBVx1EMPkhSGzEkRMZPh52DgbboXPJPhau4YPFWuELhiyxNw3AyeV1X3 SSnE0dtWp3F2sHKfYuomeLzJ9b+lm3T9Xx3hYeuC/KrVJIpi6d0Pk0sksnJZ6ioGEPI6 ZwHGtXD0x+FuVWHtUvJY71O+VF6/I8bgxCII6eTu6cylxpOsIRjnPmC8ElfjzvGczUDK VDLg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=aRmkhcMwYAqTO8vOV6/ngoOitJtK6B1FewPcD4KpoVc=; b=siRAmkxN701QsQFSFL3ux15EkW3uUm8Ihn0vsagmK8acCcmeCuLYQVm2z+cEu3OcCo M5Y97VyyGy53tAePnXstDHtp7JMo0SNW3tTa8GSewIkx6lE1r4yHfE+fNAVhF/fZhCTB soVSoO8n07UA5Qys1pIRj0uGaaoNEoixTz/6igZc2vzCfKXnzoG/JXLYIRnzF7eg0ZaL 8SIkct6XN090Xph0e8EitQFM0vET4kBN53KpZk8IxYJUgEIV3TxuomzPiOjxCCd8883X WRk4uaN1lg1dbNblDgt6gjGDFetma/OZGtFMZp3mZGSO1S8UtdKj//+tif4esfMLy0nC Npwg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530XCV1hcKRQ2cdo3n2C2bITama9R31SW5p/1zFJjZHgE8sA0tSX /sXtRCMOEuQ7sN0pfjTJeJQqy0aqcRGokHjy+P0D0A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwyRHqYXzLStk8tIiPQGcOlMHkKksRAgAp7KRpiDa1sxbUqrDSaVWvI23he8XDAHHEB83VLFXuOi/ANXAXILwY=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:2308:: with SMTP id a8mr14229909uao.88.1592078471530; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 13:01:11 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <2F7403F6-C28A-4F5A-8128-A4B4609CA7C5@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2F7403F6-C28A-4F5A-8128-A4B4609CA7C5@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2020 16:00:58 -0400
Message-ID: <CAN40gSt1qPrQiAu_sEjMGN0m7i7StckfCQxdCykn+-d8T68Jqw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "ipp@pwg.org" <ipp@pwg.org>, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic@gmail.com>
Subject: [IPP] Fwd: [TLS] Consultation About Assignment of ExtensionTypes
X-BeenThere: ipp@pwg.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: ISTO-PWG Internet Printing Protocol workgroup discussion forum <ipp.pwg.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.pwg.org/mailman/options/ipp>, <mailto:ipp-request@pwg.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipp@pwg.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipp-request@pwg.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp>, <mailto:ipp-request@pwg.org?subject=subscribe>
From: Ira McDonald via ipp <ipp@pwg.org>
Reply-To: Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5298892277061123123=="
Errors-To: ipp-bounces@pwg.org
Sender: ipp <ipp-bounces@pwg.org>

Bad news in TLS-land from a foolish ETSI standard (intentionally
breaking TLS end-to-end security for "authorized" middleboxes).

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 1:20 PM
Subject: [TLS] Consultation About Assignment of ExtensionTypes
To: <tls@ietf.org> <tls@ietf.org>


Hi.

I’m posting this on behalf of the IANA experts for the TLS registries. The
IANA experts function is described in RFC  8447 [1].

We’ve received a request from ETSI to assign three ExtensionType values
from the ExtensionType registry [2]. ETSI is the European
Telecommunications Standards Institute [3]. Ordinarily requests from other
standards organizations are approved as long as they’re not in conflict
with current work within the IETF, and for the ExtensionType registry the
policy is “Specification Required”.  The reason we are consulting this time
is that we can foresee some objections should these assignments appear in
the IANA registry.

So the request is for a part 2 of the Middlebox Security Protocol [4].  You
can read it all, but the gist is a protocol between a TLS endpoint and a
TLS middlebox that allows the middlebox read, read+delete, or
read+delete+write access to the data stream. If this idea is giving you
déjà vu, then yes, the TLS working group has considered proposals in that
domain in the past, and to put in mildly, did not choose to take them up.

To re-iterate, the policy for the registry is “Specification Required” and
a specification is available. Unless we hear convincing arguments to the
contrary, we will approve this allocation. We just prefer to have the
kerfuffle before the assignment rather than afterwards.

Thanks

Yoav
(with the IANA expert hat on)


[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8447
[2]
https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-extensiontype-values/tls-extensiontype-values.xhtml#tls-extensiontype-values-1
[3] https://www.etsi.org/about
[4]
https://docbox.etsi.org/CYBER/CYBER/Open/Latest_Drafts/CYBER-0027-2v020-TLMSP-Transport-Layer-Middlebox-Security-Protocol.pdf


_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
_______________________________________________
ipp mailing list
ipp@pwg.org
https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp