Re: [netconf] question regarding key naming

Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> Thu, 09 July 2020 14:27 UTC

Return-Path: <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
X-Original-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netconf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B6553A0BF3 for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 07:27:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 sGavgHlgSQNo for <netconf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 07:27:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from atlas5.jacobs-university.de (atlas5.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E80B3A0BF2 for <netconf@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 07:27:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (demetrius5.irc-it.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) by atlas5.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A574F830; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:27:16 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from atlas5.jacobs-university.de ([10.70.0.198]) by localhost (demetrius5.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id gwdxBoUWtq5Q; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:27:16 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hermes.jacobs-university.de", Issuer "DFN-Verein Global Issuing CA" (verified OK)) by atlas5.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:27:16 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (demetrius5.irc-it.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E98E20156; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:27:16 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de
Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius5.jacobs-university.de [10.70.0.222]) (amavisd-new, port 10028) with ESMTP id 44H2kGSx5oz0; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:27:16 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.218.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0BF9B200E4; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:27:16 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 16:27:15 +0200
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
To: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>
Cc: "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20200709142715.6a3wqdeht2ipiryl@anna.jacobs.jacobs-university.de>
Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
Mail-Followup-To: Kent Watsen <kent+ietf@watsen.net>, "netconf@ietf.org" <netconf@ietf.org>
References: <01000173313a1282-63366836-4a52-453a-a111-fd3334b2506e-000000@email.amazonses.com> <0100017333ea7297-2838a6f2-40ad-4ca5-a83a-23d3014bef92-000000@email.amazonses.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <0100017333ea7297-2838a6f2-40ad-4ca5-a83a-23d3014bef92-000000@email.amazonses.com>
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netconf/XjwDk9mKbL3LhyXYPFBXzvZfuSk>
Subject: Re: [netconf] question regarding key naming
X-BeenThere: netconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETCONF WG list <netconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netconf/>
List-Post: <mailto:netconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netconf>, <mailto:netconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2020 14:27:21 -0000

On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 02:11:09PM +0000, Kent Watsen wrote:
> Question:
> 
> In the crypto-types draft, the symmetric and asymmetric key definitions each support three encodings for the secret key-data: cleartext, hidden, and encrypted.  To see this, here are direct links to the tree diagrams:
> 
>     - https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types-16#section-2.1..4.2 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types-16#section-2.1.4.2>
>     - https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types-16#section-2.1..4.4 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types-16#section-2.1.4.4>
> 
> My question is, should the “key” and “private-key” nodes be renamed to “cleartext-key” and “cleartext-private-key”?
> 
>     PROs:
>         - a positive assertion the key is in the clear is more secure
> 
>     CONs:
>         - a longer name for the most common case
> 
> Thoughts?

I think longer names are a good thing here since the longer name may
also serve as a warning.

Perhaps raw-key (hidden-key, encrypted-key) and raw-private-key
(hidden-private-key, encrypted-private-key) if you want shorter names?

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>