Re: [mile] Secdir review: draft-ietf-mile-5070-bis-22

"Roman D. Danyliw" <rdd@cert.org> Thu, 02 June 2016 12:49 UTC

Return-Path: <rdd@cert.org>
X-Original-To: mile@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mile@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65E3512B05F; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 05:49:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cert.org
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 QjwrzOAPCZ6i; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 05:49:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from plainfield.sei.cmu.edu (plainfield.sei.cmu.edu [192.58.107.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9BEE12B027; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 05:49:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from timber.sei.cmu.edu (timber.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.21.23]) by plainfield.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4/1543) with ESMTP id u52Cn528023562; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 08:49:05 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cert.org; s=jthatj15xw2j; t=1464871745; bh=L3TlRDHEcUNUena0fLN48npXw36HdeYKa9GjI/QYUd0=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version:Sender: Reply-To; b=Qj8V+Gzy/f0lX/JFiq81oSXyI/wj7TswzMwCVdhCiiy4+1W8Vb5T4jYYbNRSRa2Ln OZFwAbparkHLtHphLNuZAiO9LFHbm4ORTaK2xgjhxXnADhI3RdibSJtCAdhTdb33Ui rN0q/w0MG+6gcqfdBo9LodjhU7L/vQmM+rtEfB+8=
Received: from CASCADE.ad.sei.cmu.edu (cascade.ad.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.28.248]) by timber.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4/1543) with ESMTP id u52Ckkt7015422; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 08:46:46 -0400
Received: from MARATHON.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([10.64.28.250]) by CASCADE.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([10.64.28.248]) with mapi id 14.03.0279.002; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 08:49:00 -0400
From: "Roman D. Danyliw" <rdd@cert.org>
To: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
Thread-Topic: [mile] Secdir review: draft-ietf-mile-5070-bis-22
Thread-Index: AQHRuqVpyhJwvFfMKk6M7OkSPkYlWZ/VizoAgACacYD///tLAA==
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 12:49:00 +0000
Message-ID: <359EC4B99E040048A7131E0F4E113AFCD9750115@marathon>
References: <15b7d5f0-63e9-15b9-b7d5-47a6be10c760@nostrum.com> <359EC4B99E040048A7131E0F4E113AFCD974F81A@marathon> <574FF391.6000806@isode.com>
In-Reply-To: <574FF391.6000806@isode.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.64.22.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mile/iU13CjRqwMQ4YYIq25gRFoS09hY>
Cc: "mile@ietf.org" <mile@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis.all@ietf.org>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mile] Secdir review: draft-ietf-mile-5070-bis-22
X-BeenThere: mile@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 12:49:10 -0000

Hi Alexey!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexey Melnikov [mailto:alexey.melnikov@isode.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 4:51 AM
> To: Roman D. Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>;; Robert Sparks
> <rjsparks@nostrum.com>;
> Cc: mile@ietf.org; draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis.all@ietf.org; iesg@ietf.org;
> secdir@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [mile] Secdir review: draft-ietf-mile-5070-bis-22
> 
> Hi Roman,
> 
> On 02/06/2016 06:03, Roman D. Danyliw wrote:
> > Hello Robert!
> >
> > Thanks again for this review.  Comments are inline ...
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Robert Sparks [mailto:rjsparks@nostrum.com]
> >> Sent: Monday, May 30, 2016 2:44 PM
> >> To: secdir@ietf.org; iesg@ietf.org;
> >> draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis.all@ietf.org
> >> Subject: Secdir review: draft-ietf-mile-5070-bis-22

[snip]

> > Consideration #3
> > ==============
> >
> > As Robert suggests, minimally, there needs to be a discussion in the
> security considerations on how these new enum values will securely be
> added to the schema/parser.  However, the question remains, what
> guidance do we provide about how often the IANA registry should be
> checked.
> >
> > ---[ begin Section 4.3]---
> >     Furthermore, the
> >     enumerated values present in this document are a static list that
> >     will be incomplete over time as select attributes can be extended by
> >     a corresponding IANA registry per Section 10.2.  Therefore, the
> >     schema to validate a given document MUST be dynamically generated
> >     from these registry values.
> > ---[ end Section 4.3 ]---
> >
> > ** Should we modify the last sentence as follows:
> >
> > "Therefore, the schema to validate a given document MUST be periodically
> regenerated from these registry values.  It is RECOMMENDED that this
> SHOULD NOT occur more frequently than xxx"
> >
> > Kathleen/Alexey/or any reader of this note: do you have a pointer to the
> prior discussion on dynamically generating a schema from an IANA registry
> referenced by Robert so that "xxx" can be populated?
> I have no idea about reasonable "xxx" values. This was never done before.
> (When it was suggested before IESG persuaded authors to change their
> documents.)

Understood.  Thanks for channeling the historical wisdom.

> While talking to www.iana.org directly from devices/programs is tempting, it
> might be better if vendors periodically download new values from IANA and
> then devices/programs talk to vendor's websites (or use vendor's update
> mechanisms).

What about language like the following in Section 4.3:

---[ begin Section 4.3]---

-- Therefore, the schema to validate a given document MUST 
-- be dynamically generated from these registry values.
++ Therefore, IODEF implementations MUST periodically update 
++ their schema and MAY need to update their parsing algorithms 
++ to incorporate newly registered values added 
++ to the IANA registries specified in Section xx.

---[ end Section 4.3 ]---

In addition, add text to the security considerations that this updating needs to be done securely.

Roman