[Rats] Re: Call for adoption: draft-deshpande-rats-multi-verifier-04 (Ends 2026-04-24)

[Manu Fontaine <[e-mail]>]

Apologies for not participating actively, I don't have enough bandwidth.

We agree this work is important; our perspective is that all relying party
trust decisions are compositions, which require multi-verifier
architectures (we currently operate a network of "verifiers of verifiers".)

We also strongly share Usama's security and privacy concerns, which amplify
with each additional independent system. We wish RATS approached the
problem from the relying party's perspective.

The full CC value proposition can only be achieved by minimizing trust
dependencies all the way to the relying party. This proposition degrades
quickly with any additional independent system added to the attester's
trust base (we sort of disagree with the sentence: "The Verifier is not
part of the Attester’s Trusted Computing Base").

We hope these issues get addressed later.

Thanks,
M


On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 6:42 PM Simon Frost <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I support adoption. The need for multi verifiers is growing and adoption
> will help bring an appropriate level of rigor to address the challenges
> from the additional complexity.
>
> Thanks
> Simon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ned Smith via Datatracker <[e-mail]>
> Sent: 17 April 2026 15:32
> To: [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]
> Subject: [Rats] Call for adoption: draft-deshpande-rats-multi-verifier-04
> (Ends 2026-04-24)
>
> This message starts a rats WG Call for Adoption of:
> draft-deshpande-rats-multi-verifier-04
>
> This Working Group Call for Adoption ends on 2026-04-24
>
> Abstract:
>    IETF RATS Architecture, defines the key role of a Verifier.  In a
>    complex system, this role needs to be performed by multiple Verfiers
>    coordinating together to assess the full trustworthiness of an
>    Attester.  This document focuses on various topological patterns for
>    a multiple Verifier system.  It only covers the architectural aspects
>    introduced by the Multi Verifier concept, which is neutral with
>    regard to specific wire formats, encoding, transport mechanisms, or
>    processing details.
>
> Please reply to this message and indicate whether or not you support
> adoption of this Internet-Draft by the rats WG. Comments to explain your
> preference are greatly appreciated. Please reply to all recipients of this
> message and include this message in your response.
>
> Authors, and WG participants in general, are reminded of the Intellectual
> Property Rights (IPR) disclosure obligations described in BCP 79 [2].
> Appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the
> provisions of BCP 78 [1] and BCP 79 [2] must be filed, if you are aware of
> any.
> Sanctions available for application to violators of IETF IPR Policy can be
> found at [3].
>
> Thank you.
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp78/
> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bcp79/
> [3] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-deshpande-rats-multi-verifier/
>
> There is also an HTML version available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-deshpande-rats-multi-verifier-04.html
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>
> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-deshpande-rats-multi-verifier-04
>
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the
> information in any medium. Thank you.
> _______________________________________________
> RATS mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>