Re: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm - Consensus Request
"Jim Schaad" <ietf@augustcellars.com> Thu, 04 April 2013 23:51 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf@augustcellars.com>
X-Original-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jose@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0401421F8BF8 for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 16:51:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2R915w35DApw for <jose@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 16:51:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp4.pacifier.net (smtp4.pacifier.net [64.255.237.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8E6B21F8AC3 for <jose@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 16:51:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Philemon (mail.augustcellars.com [50.34.17.238]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp4.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4D82B38F24 for <jose@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Apr 2013 16:51:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
To: jose@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 16:51:07 -0700
Message-ID: <017a01ce318f$482d8470$d8888d50$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: Ac4xjwlItr+CaRraTdmKwkwJbuMokQ==
Content-Language: en-us
Subject: Re: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm - Consensus Request
X-BeenThere: jose@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Javascript Object Signing and Encryption <jose.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jose>, <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/jose>
List-Post: <mailto:jose@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose>, <mailto:jose-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 23:51:48 -0000
<chair> At the request of the editors, this is a formal consensus call on the first item in the list below. If there are objects to use a single long key rather than a KDF function for the AES-CBC/HMAC algorithm please speak up now. To date nobody has said that I was wrong to assume the consensus on that item. Call ends in one week. Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: jose-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:jose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jim > Schaad > Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 3:21 PM > To: jose@ietf.org > Subject: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm > > <chair> > After spending time looking at and thinking about how to resolve this issue > since I was unable to do so at the last F2F meeting. I have come up with the > following set of issues that might need to be addressed as part of resolving > this issue. > > 1. Do we change from using KDC to having a double size key for the > algorithm? I think that there is probably a consensus that this should be done. > > 2. Should IVs be prepended to the encrypted body as part of the encoding > steps? If so then this change should be universal. > > Doing so would eliminate one field from all of the encoding formats which > should be considered a plus. > Doing so would force code writers to understand how large the IV is for all > algorithms as the IV would no longer be a separate item. > > 3. Should Authentication Tags be appended to the encrypted body as part of > the encoding steps? > > Doing so would eliminate one field from all of the encoding formats which > should be considered a plus. > Doing so would force code writers to understand how large the IV is for all > algorithms as the IV would no longer be a separate item. > Doing so would force a re-organization for the multiple recipient case as > either all recipient specific data would need to be excluded from the > authentication step or all of the recipient data would need to be included for > by all recipients. > Changing how the recipient info is process is going to give a performance > benefit for sending encrypted items for multiple recipients. > The current strategy of a single IV and key pair with AES-GCM and different > authentication data needs to have CFRG look at it. I am worried that it might > be a serious security flaw. > > 4. Should we reference the McGrew draft and provide text on how things are > changed or should we "copy" the draft into our text? > > 5. If we allow for the use of AES-GCM or AES-HMAC for doing key wrapping, > does this change how we think about any of the above questions? > > Allowing for AES-GCM for key wrapping has a benefit for hardware situations > as only the encrypt and not the decrypt functions need to be placed in > hardware. However allowing for this key wrapping give a problem as there is > no way to encode the three fields into the encrypted value unless with use > either a JSON structure in this location or we do use the single appended > binary output stream. The first approach leads to an expansion of the field by > double base64 encoding which is highly undesirable. > > Jim > > > _______________________________________________ > jose mailing list > jose@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jose
- Re: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm - Consensus … Jim Schaad
- Re: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm - Consensus … Dick Hardt
- Re: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm - Consensus … Mike Jones
- Re: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm - Consensus … John Bradley
- Re: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm - Consensus … Vladimir Dzhuvinov / NimbusDS
- Re: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm - Consensus … Russ Housley
- Re: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm - Consensus … Peck, Michael A
- Re: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm - Consensus … Dick Hardt
- Re: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm - Consensus … Matt Miller (mamille2)
- Re: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm - Consensus … Nat Sakimura
- Re: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm - Consensus … Edmund Jay
- Re: [jose] Use of AES-HMAC algorithm - Consensus … John Bradley