[perpass] draft-tschofenig-iab-webpki-evolution-00

Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> Tue, 22 October 2013 06:48 UTC

Return-Path: <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: perpass@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: perpass@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B408511E8477 for <perpass@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:48:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.625
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.625 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.026, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GNuxMwVCpvnF for <perpass@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:48:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15B4811E847C for <perpass@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:48:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.254.200] ([80.92.115.161]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MB2G8-1VOdrL3LzY-00A0ev for <perpass@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Oct 2013 08:48:20 +0200
Message-ID: <52661FCE.6040209@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 08:48:46 +0200
From: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: perpass <perpass@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:p+y5eiiN4d1Ha8NnxcYwe3+vRIWPjasHlcShBDNC3jCCbDYenqh vmADjIrAK3joLIPrfnFPFbZOYnPf6hFPm0S+s4iQPCB2msVMXHU6w11+qjRc5cuCApYnhni vIs52Dy6GD8+15g83e7LdZaWrutiGjEeeijsC6ey/yFv5RdBtEHPuu4c8JgSD5NLNvp9HQ3 +wsSI+syqbN6j65nUH2iA==
Cc: hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net
Subject: [perpass] draft-tschofenig-iab-webpki-evolution-00
X-BeenThere: perpass@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The perpass list is for discussion of the privacy properties of IETF protocols and concrete ways in which those could be improved. " <perpass.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/perpass>, <mailto:perpass-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/perpass>
List-Post: <mailto:perpass@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:perpass-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass>, <mailto:perpass-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 06:48:28 -0000

Hi all,

one item that predates the pervasive surveillance debate is the 
discussion about improving the public key infrastructure (but still has 
relevance in this discussion, see 
https://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=15579).

Following the workshop at NIST earlier this year the IAB and ISOC have 
been reaching out to different players (and are still doing that) to 
continue the conversation.

We have put together a first document that describes the different 
proposals (and as you can see the level of detail available for them and 
their maturity varies greately). Here is the writeup:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tschofenig-iab-webpki-evolution-00

The analysis is still a bit weak and requires more work but the 
proposals are hopefully captured accurately. Let us know whether there 
is something missing.

We hope that this could help to create move momentum behind certain 
proposals to get them accepted by the community and widely deployed.

Ciao
Hannes