Re: [Ntp] NTS Pools

Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com> Wed, 28 February 2024 14:13 UTC

Return-Path: <mlichvar@redhat.com>
X-Original-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A486C14F61E for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 06:13:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AYUE8CBM57uJ for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 06:13:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FF01C14F695 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 06:13:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1709129618; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=avcuiyMfDmXfNZbAYkjw7CVTddWqOyKg9a0tzzXzG1E=; b=SHjG1Xh2+xXfyYBemmZIod0iNUlDhlVMu4xSLr9UhULHOuKvXDCxXNikz5UoUGOkVODSQY iwDU/w3dRwUd0i32FLJvGUDP9tMNB/vUqW5v7/AOuR66tOIyV2aeQM27NKlo7UJYOLCgwK yEBFkd6hKc3n9oIvSzm0H+9ANcfu0xw=
Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx-ext.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-361-C3Op07dsOYWf26fTaH_9Ug-1; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 09:13:34 -0500
X-MC-Unique: C3Op07dsOYWf26fTaH_9Ug-1
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D29A3C11A14; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 14:13:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (unknown [10.43.135.229]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A0A9A20; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 14:13:32 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 15:13:30 +0100
From: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>
To: David Venhoek <david@venhoek.nl>
Cc: martin.langer=40ptb.de@dmarc.ietf.org, NTP WG <ntp@ietf.org>, Dieter.Sibold@ptb.de, Kristof.Teichel@ptb.de, Rainer Bermbach <r.bermbach@ostfalia.de>
Message-ID: <Zd8_irDuev-Pv8F5@localhost>
References: <OF2E6B0FFD.229AD710-ONC1258ACB.004EFEAA-C1258ACB.0050896E@ptb.de> <Zdx0Nst2_w1mEMKG@localhost> <CAPz_-SUSEDaFgfwvnm_FQ5M9jjAAp2Df3A7RTuYY2KPmSq5FkQ@mail.gmail.com> <Zd8MAtzsmXGGBtvq@localhost> <CAPz_-SUfREp9_t=Fsm82bfq_+MFfdW0gXJmnLhFFs9+_eHKoHQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPz_-SUfREp9_t=Fsm82bfq_+MFfdW0gXJmnLhFFs9+_eHKoHQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.1
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/RGvD8Kg0gCUPFpBYJ8vvUddpNO0>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] NTS Pools
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Time Protocol <ntp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 14:13:47 -0000

On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 02:40:03PM +0100, David Venhoek wrote:
> Dear Miroslav,
> 
> I have added the row with computational cost, and for reference also
> included a few other interesting computational cost parameters. As to

Great. Thanks.

> regard to your new proposal, I was wondering how that would work with
> the key derivation? I don't see a way to get the key derivation on the
> TLS session with the backend to result in exactly the same key as that
> coming from the session with the client (in fact, if it could I'm
> wondering whether that would be a security issue for TLS). It is
> exactly this trouble that leads to the server changes in the NTS-KE
> load balancer case.

You are right. I didn't think this through. It seems it would need to
be able to clone the TLS session to get the same master secret and
client/server random values from which are derived the keys. I suspect
the server's certificate is included in that somewhere and that has to
be different (otherwise it would be sufficient to redirect the TCP
connection).

-- 
Miroslav Lichvar