[MMUSIC] Updates to BUNDLE "Security Considerations"

Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com> Tue, 22 November 2016 08:20 UTC

Return-Path: <suhasietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98267129652; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 00:20:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 OiFhHe3gQ1FP; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 00:20:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-x22b.google.com (mail-qk0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22b]) (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 37DEF12964A; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 00:20:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id n21so12579252qka.3; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 00:20:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=L6X7RpgUYG9j4z6wUhrqDyaz7RQcfnJbbpc8rAC4cNw=; b=TnEOhPxl+w6pLHLjJxSHaQ250Kjuy2B4Cz2nvv4e7bTBmx8ZnWaOzt2eAQmFTFIXTp OCxNmUAnVJPPw24A+hg99n857+k9wCKqQ7RVNMVN8u/Xr+OPR6b7U+rjd1aufxDIhMTF l2ci3A7mATK0uD1g797a+glxjvxcciHU8PmknEP8yraI02+gfELn69vWF1sABMxyWjVh 3USfiT+3++NzeybGXD0hz68yYd6xB92E6bAXpK0wwykMvMr2fDDLoGC96N7csIcqAVBu Vgc+coX8JR5/Ly5LUNuVy7PBvuUQCKSM5jgHDBgquGUZKiFUg2npjYDqvmrirISm7ShL h9uQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=L6X7RpgUYG9j4z6wUhrqDyaz7RQcfnJbbpc8rAC4cNw=; b=UddQOePyle6SXv89i0YmZ5rWUku1wJdm2BRFkVBVqZIQgv+/2XSXZ6kJkNUf/Q58CJ Gvf+JB68L4CdX8Y3SBjeIut/x9+zkVLle1lnPQWS2bUMPsmAk87vyXVwQ4toNn2m+H6E 7Ye2pR5PrKYqsuJhVM7QRXRirXu8J7RT50RTX/tD+BoEdyS2B+fjwyBTjU8iVTF4uwGw ekMbrzOQLJ+vsbWcWw2t2cZpopBhaYfj4NwBbrLHq4OQgwcJVE6encZ4payaZYHsKy+1 5ES6QCeV/T1lCDRFF+nPrkzQWLquE04rXbaqpHAmmSfGNK8fotl01YJi7xQV9Cfmq+yW qqPA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC03E8fYBf9irn/6oTBlJwOaPMWL2AIJVHtuh/AVHngVo8e7t9zVuD2K8uVIlSsrkKlnIw56Pyj/2lbkVRg==
X-Received: by 10.55.21.206 with SMTP id 75mr19421274qkv.73.1479802817200; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 00:20:17 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.237.45.102 with HTTP; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 00:20:16 -0800 (PST)
From: Suhas Nandakumar <suhasietf@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 13:50:16 +0530
Message-ID: <CAMRcRGSMV0n-8fJb5Fiht8_V03h6k0pVuYs0KjyoK3sDVtyRuA@mail.gmail.com>
To: draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-bundle-negotiation@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1147ee4041d2210541df71fe"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mmusic/I7Ay_fV1qmYzYom4kMeeROBbzx4>
Cc: mmusic WG <mmusic@ietf.org>
Subject: [MMUSIC] Updates to BUNDLE "Security Considerations"
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mmusic/>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 08:20:22 -0000

Hello Bundle Authors

   As part of discussions on the Stephen Farrell's "COMMENT" on the SDP Mux
Draft during IESG Evaluation, there was a  proposal made to update the
Security Considerations section of the BUNDLE draft to address security
concern raised by Stephen.

The issue:
   When using a=crypto (TRANSPORT category) attribute across media
sections, the Offer/Answer negotiation MAY end up in selecting a media
section with a weaker a=crypto line.

The Proposal (from Cullen):

 So here my straw man suggestion ... it seems like the right place to
> mention this is in the security consideration for bundle and point
> out that if you offer multiple m-lines that are bundled, the
> recommendation is for the offers and answers to have the same security
> level or put the m-line with the highest level security first so that
> if bundle is selected, we get the strongest security.



Full discussion can be found here:
 https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic/current/msg17184.html




Thanks
Suhas