Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] Fix of Security Guidelines for IETF MIB Modules

Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@alumni.stanford.edu> Sun, 30 September 2018 15:40 UTC

Return-Path: <randy_presuhn@alumni.stanford.edu>
X-Original-To: mib-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mib-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19CF8126CC7 for <mib-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 08:40:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 xzlF0Q3IEo9Q for <mib-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 08:40:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-f170.google.com (mail-pg1-f170.google.com [209.85.215.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FAF01200D7 for <mib-doctors@ietf.org>; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 08:40:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-f170.google.com with SMTP id r77-v6so7718028pgr.5 for <mib-doctors@ietf.org>; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 08:40:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0NWXlLO2uCZJq5zj8Gr3qTRyBK8AjTcgiKU1HDE6B3g=; b=J4MSeupqEAXL1bQF8spqe49LGyR0vpSt5dDcGmv74uOI/4cYx1hOiNsh7t8GTfc3gt yRra8wLocudA6GAt+Ble3fg0f+Rj9rXBwoVkSZTadRnKzNxDTNLwTdz7QhegD5nOvyaF FWsg7UnsfobRhUK2x8Y7di5TrTcE9J/8MuTlu1UD/qCyqNr9dtcE5ue7/o+z3jOqNcI4 0vG8NLXkIK3vIsg7M4PY0E88mwjiNqZndsx0CQ51kim4haI+ZjjSWna8Wa8X321r9cst /Ty+UYkM5qjTJq1uqZZ0BFW2+sQK9jdriDYGxWRDhMZKU45pxZa09ovxneFv70DT6pnu UATw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfoi67LXxDBdPvTbLQnxm7eT9qzY1bUn9reYoLSdPvazpgEjertmK dHJI3MvV8INVbJoqIJheMIjGJA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV61G2SntTbF7bDChSGkNzijLrpYD26yyQEIsv8mDXreQX1xiC1nOhvTL9Axznj9WLIFgYx/hkA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7e0f:: with SMTP id b15-v6mr7632814plm.246.1538322029466; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 08:40:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-69-181-241-121.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [69.181.241.121]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x186-v6sm3778446pfx.152.2018.09.30.08.40.28 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 30 Sep 2018 08:40:29 -0700 (PDT)
To: Glenn Mansfield Keeni <glenn@cysols.com>, mib-doctors@ietf.org, warren@kumari.net, ibagdona@gmail.com
References: <7f59ba0b-1358-1015-cd85-4c470ad73d9a@cysols.com> <f8bce0d0-cd96-7bd1-c785-e459860d863d@alumni.stanford.edu> <d54348ed-87da-8120-0b37-82143cdad3d3@cysols.com>
From: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@alumni.stanford.edu>
Message-ID: <68a4912f-f0b4-1ecd-5341-3ee3e9adc8ce@alumni.stanford.edu>
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2018 08:40:25 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <d54348ed-87da-8120-0b37-82143cdad3d3@cysols.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mib-doctors/FsMASuUcWZdKuQCldkr6W0eUM9c>
Subject: Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] Fix of Security Guidelines for IETF MIB Modules
X-BeenThere: mib-doctors@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: MIB Doctors list <mib-doctors.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mib-doctors>, <mailto:mib-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mib-doctors/>
List-Post: <mailto:mib-doctors@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mib-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors>, <mailto:mib-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2018 15:40:32 -0000

Hi -


On 9/30/2018 5:59 AM, Glenn Mansfield Keeni wrote:
> 
> Hi,
>  >         What
>  >         is the point of limiting read access and then sending the
>  >         information in the clear?
> Total agreement. Sending info in the clear is by default NG and must
> be strongly discouraged.
> It will help to have some proposed replacement text for
>  > OLD:  It is thus important to control even GET and/or NOTIFY access to
>  >        these objects and possibly to even encrypt the values of these
>  >        objects when sending them over the network via SNMP.
...

As I wrote previously, this would be editorially tricky since the
paragraph currently conflates "sensitive" (which I take to mean
"that which should be protected from disclosure") with "vulnerable"
(which I take to mean "that which should be protected from
modification").  It *is* possible to have something which one wants
to protect from modification, but there's no need to protect it from
disclosure.  For example, consider a hostname.  Are we willing to
do major surgery on this paragraph, probably splitting it into two,
and thus affecting the structure of these security considerations?

Randy