IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lake] Review of draft-selander-lake-authz-00

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 07 November 2022 21:46 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: lake@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lake@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4306CC152701 for <lake@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Nov 2022 13:46:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BNWu46Rj2zme for <lake@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Nov 2022 13:46:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [176.58.120.209]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1EBF3C152707 for <lake@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Nov 2022 13:46:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dyas.sandelman.ca (dynamic-046-114-039-082.46.114.pool.telefonica.de [46.114.39.82]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2D691F44E; Mon, 7 Nov 2022 21:46:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dyas.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EBF52A0EFF; Mon, 7 Nov 2022 21:46:12 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from dyas (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dyas.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9CE4A0A6F; Mon, 7 Nov 2022 21:46:12 +0000 (GMT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
to: Marco Tiloca <marco.tiloca=40ri.se@dmarc.ietf.org>, "lake@ietf.org" <lake@ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <176307.1667846835@dyas>
References: <e7e16233-3bfc-56b0-1a77-dd8ce370bf44@ri.se> <176307.1667846835@dyas>
Comments: In-reply-to Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> message dated "Mon, 07 Nov 2022 18:47:15 +0000."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2022 21:46:12 +0000
Message-ID: <181572.1667857572@dyas>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lake/4-seYN1Xntf_qxYQFaoF18iLZOg>
Subject: Re: [Lake] Review of draft-selander-lake-authz-00
X-BeenThere: lake@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Lightweight Authenticated Key Exchange <lake.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lake>, <mailto:lake-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lake/>
List-Post: <mailto:lake@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lake-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lake>, <mailto:lake-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2022 21:46:23 -0000

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
    > Marco Tiloca <marco.tiloca=40ri.se@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
    >>    It is fine (although excessive) to assume that, but later on the
    >> voucher is intended to be computed over the whole authentication
    >> credential CRED_R, not only on the public key PK_V.

    > I don't think that we can calculate the voucher across CRED_R as the
    > protocol is currently designed.  Why do we need to do that?  Why isn't
    > PK_V enough?

Goran has corrected my understanding about what CRED_R, and I just have the
wrong terminology...


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email