Re: [pkng] some thoughts

[Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]>]

On 11/12/09 1:27 PM, Leif Johansson wrote:

> 1. bottoms up vs top down
> 
> In PKIX the key relationship is between the key and the CA. I
> believe PKNG should turn this around and be designed based on the
> relationship between the key and the key consumer.
> 
> I'm consciously trying to avoid using terms like user-centric or
> user-managed since they evoke images of specific technologies or
> patterns and in fact I'm thinking about the RPKI and the KARP
> when writing this.

Leif, I skimmed your email while I was sitting in the DTNRG session this
morning, so the mention of bottom up rang a bell. PKI is impossible when
there is no "I" to be had (distressed networks, ad-hoc meshes, etc.). As
people carry more and smaller personal devices, they might want to
exchange information directly in their interactions (beamed, radioed,
etc.). They won't necessarily have access to canonical sources of trust
located in hierarchies or roots. Further, they might not *care* about
hierarchical trust, instead putting a higher value on bottom up or peer
to peer trust. Perhaps trust will be based more on social networking and
personal interconnections (think IM buddy lists, LinkedIn, Facebook,
Twitter). Keys and certs (or whatever we end up calling them) are cheap,
so people might generate new ones when needed (or for different
purposes), check credentials with people or entities in their network
only when they interact with a person, etc. We have ways to push this
information out (hey everyone, I've got a new keything) and for
performing on-demand checks (hey Leif, Paul says his keything has a
print of foo, is that consistent with what you know?).

Just a few random ideas generated on the Nozomi train out of Hiroshima... :)

Peter

--
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/