Re: [mile] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-mile-xmpp-grid-09

Matthew Miller <linuxwolf+ietf@outer-planes.net> Wed, 06 March 2019 01:28 UTC

Return-Path: <linuxwolf@outer-planes.net>
X-Original-To: expand-draft-ietf-mile-xmpp-grid.all@virtual.ietf.org
Delivered-To: mile@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 46DFC1279E6; Tue, 5 Mar 2019 17:28:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: xfilter-draft-ietf-mile-xmpp-grid.all@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xfilter-draft-ietf-mile-xmpp-grid.all@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D358B12F1AC for <xfilter-draft-ietf-mile-xmpp-grid.all@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2019 17:28:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=outer-planes-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 W3Ehv3Jf4_kL for <xfilter-draft-ietf-mile-xmpp-grid.all@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2019 17:28:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe2e.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2e]) (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 544031279E6 for <draft-ietf-mile-xmpp-grid.all@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Mar 2019 17:28:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe2e.google.com with SMTP id u13so1238774vsk.0 for <draft-ietf-mile-xmpp-grid.all@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Mar 2019 17:28:09 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=outer-planes-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=8zudjt73tXrpFrEPGKciRneIYnozOUoORewfhwnvB+c=; b=hRdkNMCfpx2GidQmCr3N0MInrXGKWrhcgWCqlnzw5X0LOqtejTY+KAPIbm8CGCLvip z3fWbFc/XukIcg6XIt5LLo8W//NYZR1ZKHIRh6t5k/jwVyiGZlFcJV7LZWeWDyV7m39Y kylA3gFBQw9hq9lhQVZOx1rO825y8O+q6Z4z+VKOvPzuprPpcsecfQBY9alYpog94hdX STq4H37H1nasyuOqZAp2Bb2bQ7HSsUfYIsRg2FipmfnEJqgPZc6MgHZWgdL3U5+KT4Tz i49Oj9P9KuMDBwSkqN/6BDSnV5Xwe8uj4sLwOAnmxA1YBaEAl9er8zpUutU0DxugADit FxJA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=8zudjt73tXrpFrEPGKciRneIYnozOUoORewfhwnvB+c=; b=rklf/jDR0lRyI7I8K8YQil89rt3hlRNIJ4C5U98sO43f/8bqR6PUvmuVotthhBa3NA Gkxvvm2iX5rPNcWqzKB3v09z9E2ztAIM7EJgd6QINhDeTU1XkAHJRZWlUnKRqnffDoEm H+N6XdAPJ/fo9yACcnZUny2xBM079FboAnqIOjaw2hCsQWShVZe5tTmDgLS2cgKDNbqJ M4CPXu1iwuRgZgRTUWjKguYemqTQoK1VoITdwXXy9ayi/71WYmhU1kvx5s5y32yVyKC6 mxGnmiQGg68qU1KmmQhFmpLSvDuSbxFgO8ilasqaKAHAxd6LbXSmyGCqKMC8m9sU8ztR CQSQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVeBKdTkqem8sk/vAPX+jgATtUIle3FXnV/Xch9dOHQ8RqYRe8d TALkdk5MT0AS2whkxQaoKhn1VMx/Lto7PH3C6TsuzQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx3Gi6SzMKj22QZWnuafPvG7GZLteFAuYdMyBhFo9TSHSTdb3Ycwyu8RIkF//VplIedqkCLXKQzRZsl5SkkX18=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:9a:: with SMTP id t26mr2786382vsp.178.1551835688075; Tue, 05 Mar 2019 17:28:08 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <154826649938.7505.11018194912932133243@ietfa.amsl.com> <5CFE429E-31EA-4261-B1CD-17181200F394@cisco.com> <8eaa83e6-5218-9584-ad4e-5e2e7f8e80ad@mozilla.com>
In-Reply-To: <8eaa83e6-5218-9584-ad4e-5e2e7f8e80ad@mozilla.com>
From: Matthew Miller <linuxwolf+ietf@outer-planes.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2019 18:27:57 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOgaonsCpgf9OW3yntThu==um4u5_RcL_nk_YQdctYpcWTY7Xg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@mozilla.com>
Cc: "Nancy Cam-Winget (ncamwing)" <ncamwing@cisco.com>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, "mile@ietf.org" <mile@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-mile-xmpp-grid.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mile-xmpp-grid.all@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f019dd058362e602"
Resent-From: <alias-bounces@ietf.org>
Resent-To: ncamwing@cisco.com, syam1@cisco.com, scottp@cisco.com, stpeter@mozilla.com, takeshi_takahashi@nict.go.jp, david.waltermire@nist.gov, rdd@cert.org, alexey.melnikov@isode.com, ekr@rtfm.com, kaduk@mit.edu, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, mile-chairs@ietf.org, mile@ietf.org, Takeshi Takahashi <takeshi_takahashi@nict.go.jp>
Resent-Message-Id: <20190306012812.46DFC1279E6@ietfa.amsl.com>
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2019 17:28:12 -0800 (PST)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mile/bQO2eggDpYxo7yWYDleJnHQENYI>
Subject: Re: [mile] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-mile-xmpp-grid-09
X-BeenThere: mile@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Managed Incident Lightweight Exchange, IODEF extensions and RID exchanges" <mile.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mile>, <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mile/>
List-Post: <mailto:mile@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mile>, <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2019 01:28:13 -0000

Thank you Nancy and Peter for your replies.  I look forward to the next
revision.

On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 7:39 PM Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@mozilla.com>;
wrote:

> A few further thoughts from a co-author but not primary author.
>
> On 3/4/19 4:00 PM, Nancy Cam-Winget (ncamwing) wrote:
> > Hi Matt, thanks for the review.  Please see below for comments:
> >
> > ´╗┐On 1/23/19, 10:01, "Matthew Miller" <linuxwolf+ietf@outer-planes.net>;
> wrote:
> >
> >     Reviewer: Matthew Miller
> >     Review result: Has Issues
> >
> >     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.
> >
> >     Document: draft-ietf-mile-xmpp-grid-09
> >     Reviewer: Matthew A. Miller
> >     Review Date: 2018-01-23
> >     IETF LC End Date: 2019-01-14
> >     IESG Telechat date: 2019-01-24
> >
> >     Summary:
> >
> >     This document defines an architecture for distributing security
> >     information using publish-subscribe semantics over XMPP.  It is
> >     well written and addressed many (but not all) known concerns
> >     of a publish-subscribe
> >
> >     This document has issues that should be addressed before it is
> >     ready to be published as a Proposed Standard.
> >
> >
> >     Major Issues:
> >
> >     The document does not explicitly discuss the implications of the
> >     Controller and Broker having plaintext access and control of the
> >     published data.  It seems to be implied in the section 8.2.3 for
> >     the Controller (and, for those proficient with XMPP, the Broker).
> >     I am not strongly recommending any sort of end-to-end protections
> >     be proscribed (since existing protections are likely unsuitable
> >     for this architecture).
> > [NCW] We have added a sentence in 8.3.3 to address protection
> > against controller/broker to employ end-to-end encryption.
>
> Matt's point about "this architecture" is relevant. We should make it
> clearer in the document that the XMPP-Grid is not intended to be an open
> system that any arbitrary entity can join; instead, it is a private
> network (not connected to the public XMPP network) to which only
> authorized entities are allowed access.
>

Thanks, I think both clarifications will be very helpful.


> >     The document does not have any real discussion around persistence
> >     of node items.  if they are expected or desired to be persisted,
> >     then there should be some discussion about retention policies
> >     (meaning: deployments ought to have one), and behaviors when a
> >     Platform subscribes to the Topic (e.g., should or may automatically
> >     send the last published item to the recent subscriber).  If not,
> >     then some discussion on the implications of existing/historic
> >     data being unavailable through this mechanism.
> > [NCW] Fair point. We added the following statements to the document to
> address this -
> > Note that the control plane may optionally also implement XEP-0203 to
> facilitate delayed
> > delivery of messages to the connected consumer as described in XEP-0060