Re: [kitten] Authentication indicator - Do we need client indicator ?
Simo Sorce <simo@redhat.com> Wed, 18 February 2015 16:22 UTC
Return-Path: <simo@redhat.com>
X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9488A1A89B3 for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 08:22:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.911
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 ARdVD1hY-Ywf for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 08:22:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5928A1A89A9 for <kitten@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 08:22:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t1IGLx7b010924 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:22:00 -0500
Received: from [10.3.113.54] (ovpn-113-54.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.54]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t1IGLwOR020774; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:21:58 -0500
Message-ID: <1424276518.6980.28.camel@willson.usersys.redhat.com>
From: Simo Sorce <simo@redhat.com>
To: Greg Hudson <ghudson@mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:21:58 -0500
In-Reply-To: <54E4BA4D.3030405@mit.edu>
References: <1424275015.6980.23.camel@willson.usersys.redhat.com> <54E4BA4D.3030405@mit.edu>
Organization: Red Hat, Inc.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.27
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/kitten/eS8hbTYkZVW7-AQZGBh8QC7C-_Q>
Cc: kitten@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [kitten] Authentication indicator - Do we need client indicator ?
X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation <kitten.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/kitten>, <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/kitten/>
List-Post: <mailto:kitten@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten>, <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:22:07 -0000
On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 11:14 -0500, Greg Hudson wrote: > On 02/18/2015 10:56 AM, Simo Sorce wrote: > > In AD-CAMMAC we mention that if the KDC want to make sure to bind the > > CAMMAC to a specific client principal, then this need to be done with > > data embedded into an AD within CAMMAC, but in AD-CAMMAC we specify no > > AD type to do that. > > CAMMACs are already bound to a client principal name. You are probably > thinking of the final paragraph of the security considerations, which > refers to the service principal name. Doh! Ok, and Auth Indicator doesn't care about Service Principal Names. So ... nevermind :) Simo. -- Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York