[martini] #46: Security Directorate review of draft-ietf-martini-reqs-07.txt

"martini issue tracker" <trac@tools.ietf.org> Sun, 27 June 2010 18:40 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: martini issue tracker <trac@tools.ietf.org>
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
To: john.elwell@siemens-enterprise.com, ho@alum.mit.edu
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:40:21 -0000
Message-ID: <057.f6f86a244cf71c330f658826f6f7debc@tools.ietf.org>
Cc: martini@ietf.org
Subject: [martini] #46: Security Directorate review of draft-ietf-martini-reqs-07.txt

#46: Security Directorate review of draft-ietf-martini-reqs-07.txt
-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------
 Reporter:  ho@…                   |       Owner:  john.elwell@…                     
     Type:  defect                 |      Status:  new                               
 Priority:  minor                  |   Milestone:  milestone1                        
Component:  reqs                   |     Version:  1.0                               
 Severity:  Submitted WG Document  |    Keywords:                                    
-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------
 Do not be alarmed. I have reviewed this document as part of the
 security directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents
 being processed by the IESG. These comments were written primarily
 for the benefit of the security area directors. Document editors and
 WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call
 comments.

 The abstract:
 This document states requirements for a standardized SIP registration
 mechanism for multiple addresses of record, the mechanism being
 suitable for deployment by SIP service providers on a large scale in
 support of small to medium sized Private Branch Exchanges (PBXs).
 The requirements are for a solution that can, as a minimum, support
 AORs based on E.164 numbers.

 There are 21 requirements, and two of them address security.

 I think requirement 14 leaves out a couple of things:
 REQ14 - The mechanism MUST be able to operate over a transport that
 provides integrity protection and confidentiality.
 It should probably require "end-to-end" integrity protection and
 confidentiality between the two entities (SIP-PBX and the SSP).

 And I think requirement 15 should say something about how the two
 entites are expected to agree on an authentication method, and that
 the authentication should apply to every registration message
 exchanged by the entities. That is, once they have authenticated,
 then that information should be tied to requirement 14 and ensure that
 the integrity and/or confidentiality is defined between the two
 entities (by use of, for example, an authenticated key exchange
 protocol) on all subsequent messages between the two.
 REQ15 - The mechanism MUST support authentication of the SIP-PBX by
 the SSP and vice versa.
 I'd also add that it MUST support termination of authenticaton and
 re-authentication.

 Minor non-security things:

 Requirement 4 has a triple negative ("not" "prevent" "without"), and
 I'm not sure what the heck it means.

 Requirement 5 has a typo, probably "internally" for "internal".

 Hilarie

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/martini/trac/ticket/46>
martini <http://tools.ietf.org/martini/>

[martini] #46: Security Directorate review of dra… martini issue tracker
Re: [martini] #46: Security Directorate review of… martini issue tracker