Re: [perpass] Tiny stacks

Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> Mon, 09 December 2013 22:53 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: perpass@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: perpass@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EE111A1F5B for <perpass@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 14:53:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 oZtTtp6KNcNC for <perpass@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 14:53:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-x232.google.com (mail-wi0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59DB61A1F4E for <perpass@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 14:53:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f178.google.com with SMTP id bz8so4410998wib.17 for <perpass@ietf.org>; Mon, 09 Dec 2013 14:53:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Dygka+s3/Svf7/3/7Jo6Ege54AaSW9nNy+0F3jX2lhk=; b=qL+Jpe4wY1tTfSPOf58r614HlSvxl1gzmxHm6JrT8JmYPV0uNsncriwMT36oBngTHs ybhmHjpjlf0z59z9AE0QJiTV2R9XZScUHnRmuurLFuwnbnR2o42+zE5G6ISgixkKlFI6 Tfqv2kdANCcCQC9VOwxMOuEFh4qSV6qntpUWyLB1QEYFo/hIkC9DskAnm7LimCXUHtT3 sbCRkE93KASumFzqOJkHr9sVpsuE1lKH7SZU+iiVzYwPKZLDuQnlUPiPdzO+xh/bQb/V chKie3PeLzAOEEYQusu07WkAJdcuEVyAUzS77O877AydOPrmqhBdyFF5rdN/FonkC7Cz wDJA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.94.167 with SMTP id dd7mr37708729wjb.43.1386629580738; Mon, 09 Dec 2013 14:53:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.243.136 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 14:53:00 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAL02cgR4T=HdKq64Fq6pJWezp=_20iL8jB+knJoid=LUjDKpWg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <290E20B455C66743BE178C5C84F1240847E5103799@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk> <2C66A416-5F07-4803-A4C0-BB61734BA42E@nominum.com> <290E20B455C66743BE178C5C84F1240847E510379A@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk> <529F7690.2050302@gmx.net> <290E20B455C66743BE178C5C84F1240847E510379C@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk> <52A1BBBC.9090509@cs.tcd.ie> <290E20B455C66743BE178C5C84F1240847E510379D@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk> <52A4D7D9.9000603@cs.tcd.ie> <52A4E412.4030804@gmail.com> <72B86100-E73E-46BD-ABD6-8E35D56DBDDA@cisco.com> <52A61E4C.6020403@gmail.com> <CAL02cgR4T=HdKq64Fq6pJWezp=_20iL8jB+knJoid=LUjDKpWg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 17:53:00 -0500
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwhF+NJCEfjzbj5fRMn=U7+Kq61Qw628Qzsq9C0aaeNQEQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
To: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7bb03c469855e704ed21dbd9"
Cc: perpass <perpass@ietf.org>, "Stewart Bryant (stbryant)" <stbryant@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [perpass] Tiny stacks
X-BeenThere: perpass@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The perpass list is for IETF discussion of pervasive monitoring. " <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: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 22:53:09 -0000

On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx> wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Brian E Carpenter <
> brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 09/12/2013 11:04, Stewart Bryant (stbryant) wrote:
>> (on a different list and under a differeny Subject header)
>> ...
>>
>> > Remembering of course that some platforms which wish
>> > to use the Internet simply do not have the capability for
>> > other than a very tiny very basic stack.
>> >
>> > I always use the PIC and the Arduino to remind myself what the
>> > lower end of the franchise looks like.
>>
>> It seems to me that perpass should think a little bit about
>> privacy and anti-surveillance issues for devices with tiny
>> stacks, and see if that calls for any specific IETF work items.
>>
>
> This is not unexplored territory.
> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-core-coap-18>
> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-aks-crypto-sensors-02>
> <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/dice/>
>

COAP on a PIC? Really?

Or are you talking about the 32bit one rather than the 8 bit one that is
made in roughly double quantities year on year. The 8 bit one comes with
4Kbytes. I don't think you can get a TCP/IP stack in there.

But you do quite often need to get some form of end to end security from a
control system to an end point with a 6502 or Z80 class embedded device
that is connected over an I2C or RS485 link.

Right now that territory is occupied by MODBUS which is a protocol that
hasn't changed since I used it thirty years ago before I went to college.
It has no authentication or encryption and only limited error checking
capabilities. We run nuclear power plants off MODBUS but the folk who do
firework displays use MIDI because it has better error checking (oh I kid
you not).


We don't necessarily need to do IP end to end. I have never been a fan of
that particular dogma. IP is a rotten match for RS485 at 9600baud. But
being able to authenticate control messages and sensor readings end to end
is badly needed.


-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/