Re: [KAML] Re: Chicago bar-BOF summary

Gerald Beuchelt <beuchelt@sun.com> Fri, 14 September 2007 12:34 UTC

Return-path: <kaml-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWANb-0002BM-Ip; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:34:39 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWANa-0002BG-Ms for kaml@ietf.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:34:38 -0400
Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IWANZ-0003VJ-CN for kaml@ietf.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:34:38 -0400
Received: from fe-amer-10.sun.com ([192.18.109.80]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l8ECYasY010081 for <kaml@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:34:36 GMT
Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JOC00E01YTDWP00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from beuchelt@sun.com) for kaml@ietf.org; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 06:34:36 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.16] ([209.150.59.40]) by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JOC00EJ7YXNP380@mail-amer.sun.com>; Fri, 14 Sep 2007 06:34:36 -0600 (MDT)
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:34:28 -0400
From: Gerald Beuchelt <beuchelt@sun.com>
Subject: Re: [KAML] Re: Chicago bar-BOF summary
In-reply-to: <46E9AA7B.4040508@anl.gov>
To: "Douglas E. Engert" <deengert@anl.gov>
Message-id: <46EA7FD4.2030508@sun.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <46DE5CC1.10204@it.su.se> <8158D751-0EE0-4D58-81DB-549C4A413B68@jpl.nasa.gov> <9B9324ACE4CA354EAF122E7D0E0673B64BDF23@NDMSEVS22.ndc.nasa.gov> <D80F0FFA-D9FF-48F1-B410-75078B40E8D7@jpl.nasa.gov> <46E1A274.1080600@anl.gov> <D208EBD0-1182-49C6-9A6F-B3210C4627E5@jpl.nasa.gov> <46E79162.2010402@it.su.se> <C5437591-6811-4087-9C89-D7959A6872D4@jpl.nasa.gov> <46E9905E.3040404@sun.com> <370D0C3F-8DBD-4FCD-82EA-D6155EB06F41@jpl.nasa.gov> <46E9A3DB.4040608@sun.com> <46E9AA7B.4040508@anl.gov>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
X-Scan-Signature: fb6060cb60c0cea16e3f7219e40a0a81
Cc: kaml@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: kaml@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about SAML and Kerberos intersections <kaml.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kaml>, <mailto:kaml-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/kaml>
List-Post: <mailto:kaml@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:kaml-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kaml>, <mailto:kaml-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: kaml-bounces@ietf.org

Douglas E. Engert wrote:
>
>
> Gerald Beuchelt wrote:
>> It is my understanding (and I am also no lawyer!) that the article by 
>> John Brezak carries a patent license regarding the actual content of 
>> the document itself.
>>
>> Now, this document specifies the PAC for Windows 2000, with the 
>> exception of 18 reserved fields. What it also does not specify is any 
>> PAC changes in XP, 2003, Vista, or 2008. It also does not specify any 
>> backend infrastructure (e.g. discovery or resolution services, policy 
>> tools, or data storage, etc.) that might or might not be covered by 
>> patents or other intellectual property rights. Also, some of the 
>> default SIDs in the Windows implementation that are required for 
>> evaluating group membership (e.g. EVERYONE, etc.) are also not 
>> included in this document.
>>
>
> There was also the IETF:
> draft-brezak-win2k-krb-authz-01.txt
> from October 2002, I still have a copy, but does not address XP, 2003
> or Vista.
>
> Samba has been working on using the PAC created by Windows, and trying
> to get XP to use a Samba/Heimdal created PAC. So they may have addressed
> a lot of these issues.
>
> http://samba.org/ftp/unpacked/trunk-cluster/source/libads/authdata.c
> referes to KERB_VALIDATION_INFO
(Disclaimer: I have not been actively working on these subjects for a 
few years - please be patient with me and correct my failing memory :-))

The samba 3 domain model is distincly different from the AD/Windows 
200x  and NT4 domain models in that it is completely non-interoperable: 
you can not mix samba domain controllers into an AD or NT4 domain, or 
vice versa. The now-in-alpha samba 4 tries to address this - I will 
probably take a closer look at where they are at this point in time.

>
>> In addition, I do seem to remember that Microsoft at some time 
>> offered a complete description (purportedly including the 18 reserved 
>> fields) of the PAC that came with a license explicitly prohibiting 
>> implementation. Since I did not touch this document, I cannot speak 
>> to its actual content.
>> So, as I am not a lawyer, I am quite paranoid when it comes to other 
>> people's IPR and license terms. Therefore I am just cautioning the 
>> use of these specifications, since they are (i) old (Windows 2000), 
>> (ii) not peer-reviewed, and (iii) not published by an established 
>> standards organization with a clear IPR regime.
>>
>> Sorry to be such a pain, but if the majority of this group is intend 
>> on pursuing the NT PAC path, I would suggest that someone approaches 
>> Microsoft to get clarification about the status of the spec.
>>
>
> I don't think trying to add something to the Microsoft PAC is a good 
> idea.
> But if they add something "Level of assurance" to the PAC using it is
> another story.
>
Agreed.

> Adding another auth_data element of SAML does not require the 
> Microsoft PAC.
>
Assuming that Windows (and other Kerb implementations) ignore data after 
the PAC, yes?

Best,

Gerald


_______________________________________________
KAML mailing list
KAML@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kaml