IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] Splitting the Roughtime draft?

Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net> Sun, 31 January 2021 21:02 UTC

Return-Path: <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
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 1C9D23A1254 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:02:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.036
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=1.951, PDS_RDNS_DYNAMIC_FP=0.001, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no 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 YjMirFdQe-fi for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:02:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.1.69]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14D6B3A1245 for <ntp@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:02:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shuksan (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 346D7406061; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:02:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3
To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
cc: NTP WG <ntp@ietf.org>, hmurray@megapathdsl.net
From: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
In-Reply-To: Message from Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com> of "Sun, 31 Jan 2021 11:48:08 PST." <CACsn0cmH2QhaTL9FjfeKX0EL1E21ZC7_ae4JX2GHdu+38fh_8w@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:02:25 -0800
Message-Id: <20210131210225.346D7406061@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/j1cg8TRgx1sCpnErQ5v-5pNTurI>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] Splitting the Roughtime draft?
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <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: Sun, 31 Jan 2021 21:02:27 -0000

watsonbladd@gmail.com said:
> Downthread you mentioned revocation, and I think signing a specifically
> formatted recovation message would work fine. This would be a roughtime
> message, just one with a special tag alone that demonstrates the operator
> considers the key compromised. 

Without a valid key, you can't verify that message so bad guys can forge one.  
That seems like a nasty complication.  Do you want to go down that path?



-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email