Re: [Rats] Rats and EAT

Yes. As an outsider, it would appear that the focus of TNC is moving 
"upward" in the stack, looking more at software asset management (or 
configuration management) and less at hardware layer attestation.

OTOH the spec you cited does have all of Sec. 8 discussing how TPM fits 
into the picture.

Thanks,
	Yaron

On 09/07/18 12:49, Henk Birkholz wrote:
> Replying to myself:
> 
>> https://trustedcomputinggroup.org/wp-content/uploads/TCG-TNC-Architecture-for-Interoperability-Version-2.0-Revision-13-.pdf 
>>
> 
> (somehow got an extra char in to that string)
> 
> On 07/09/2018 11:47 AM, Henk Birkholz wrote:
>> Hello Yaron,
>>
>> the TNC architecture was revised and update to 2.0 last year. You can 
>> find the current detailed architecture diagram in this document on 
>> page 20 (Figure 5).
>>
>>> https://trustedcomputinggroup.org/wp-content/uploads/TCG-TNC-Architecture-for-Interoperability-Version-2.0-Raevision-13-.pdf 
>>>
>>
>> There is also this freshly minted RFC that makes use of the 
>> architecture (RFC 5792, called IF-M in TCG lingo):
>>
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8412/
>>
>>
>> Viele Grüße,
>>
>> Henk
>>
>> On 07/07/2018 11:51 PM, Yaron Sheffer wrote:
>>> I'm a bit surprised that nobody's mentioning the work done by the 
>>> IETF NEA working group <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/nea/about/>. 
>>> Yes, it's been some time ago, but the people involved were (to the 
>>> best of my knowledge) involved with the TCG community.
>>>
>>> NEA was about desktop machines and NAC rather than mobile devices, 
>>> but hey, by now we should be looking for solutions that encompass 
>>> both technologies!
>>>
>>> See this diagram 
>>> <https://wiki.strongswan.org/projects/1/wiki/trustednetworkconnect> 
>>> on how the complex NEA/TNC architecture fits together, including the 
>>> TPM.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>      Yaron
>>>
>>>
>>> On 06/07/18 22:20, Laurence Lundblade wrote:
>>>> Hey EAT and Rats folks, just became aware of IETF attestation work 
>>>> running in parallel. Seems like EAT is focused more on an 
>>>> independent signed, self-secured data structure with a lot of clams. 
>>>> Rats, seems more TPM and full protocol centric, but I’m still reading.
>>>>
>>>> Here’s a list of attestation work that Diego and Henk made:
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-pastor-i2nsf-nsf-remote-attestation/ 
>>>>
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-birkholz-i2nsf-tuda/
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mandyam-eat/
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-mandyam-tokbind-attest/
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-birkholz-reference-ra-interaction-model/ 
>>>>
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-birkholz-yang-basic-remote-attestation/ 
>>>>
>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-birkholz-attestation-terminology/ 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A couple of other interesting non-TPM “attestation" technologies:
>>>> - FIDO 
>>>> <https://www.w3.org/Submission/2015/SUBM-fido-key-attestation-20151120/> does 
>>>> attestation of FIDO authenticators
>>>> - Android KeyStore 
>>>> <https://developer.android.com/training/articles/security-key-attestation> uses 
>>>> the term to mean proving the provenance of a stored key
>>>> - IEEE 802.1AR is kind of an attestation too
>>>>
>>>> FYI, the IETF attestation events I know of so far are:
>>>>  - I’ll present EAT at HotRFC Sunday around 18:00
>>>>  - Secdispatch discussion of EAT (and Rats?) Monday at 15:30 (At 
>>>> least I hope; no confirmation yet)
>>>>  - EAT BarBof Monday at 18:00
>>>>  - Rats BarBof Thursday after dinner
>>>>
>>>> I will attend them all :-)
>>>>
>>>> LL
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rats mailing list
>>> Rats@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats
>>>