IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rats] EAT claims needed by TEEP

Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com> Thu, 29 October 2020 21:06 UTC

Return-Path: <lgl@island-resort.com>
X-Original-To: rats@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rats@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 949FD3A0114 for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:06:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.894
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.894 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
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 bB5QJMCSEeV5 for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:06:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p3plsmtpa09-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtpa09-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [173.201.193.239]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E02B53A0147 for <rats@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:06:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.81] ([76.167.193.86]) by :SMTPAUTH: with ESMTPA id YF8IktZh2hxTPYF8IkLBZE; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:06:54 -0700
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=PLjKRdmC c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=5f9b2eee a=t2DvPg6iSvRzsOFYbaV4uQ==:117 a=t2DvPg6iSvRzsOFYbaV4uQ==:17 a=7CQSdrXTAAAA:8 a=CRrk88pQzB9dKn-9xysA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=6qy36IhDiBWzmJzcoZMA:9 a=C7YeEDshcqagmwDt:21 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=a-qgeE7W1pNrGK8U0ZQC:22
X-SECURESERVER-ACCT: lgl@island-resort.com
From: Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com>
Message-Id: <3370D92E-23C2-41C3-B86F-A65C168E9082@island-resort.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_64EE1195-F5A7-4DFC-A62E-8A27ABFCCF32"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.17\))
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:06:53 -0700
In-Reply-To: <AM6PR08MB423141370A5CE9DEF6C732C69C140@AM6PR08MB4231.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Cc: Simon Frost <Simon.Frost@arm.com>, "rats@ietf.org" <rats@ietf.org>, teep <teep@ietf.org>, Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>
To: Thomas Fossati <Thomas.Fossati@arm.com>
References: <BL0PR2101MB102770B8E03B95A44497004CA3190@BL0PR2101MB1027.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <7607E6BF-459C-4A32-AAE2-08117A97E06B@island-resort.com> <BL0PR2101MB1027EA205417DAF375BA7085A3160@BL0PR2101MB1027.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <B1FDD70B-2530-454C-90AF-F44EEDC4F1F3@island-resort.com> <AM6PR08MB342916CCDD01E8698BB3C883EF170@AM6PR08MB3429.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <2D53BD60-4FA8-4153-B28B-585E902845AE@island-resort.com> <AM6PR08MB423141370A5CE9DEF6C732C69C140@AM6PR08MB4231.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.17)
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfJsxIRhglPYq6QUVgUDUSvnRkoiuELx6gHlslFltCHqyyzdwXoZSb0uPmhsiMmyx6tNwk251U6CfUno/r0kmlVYYzES09jeuJ7TQTezOkpkV8+k7BRhb omUoSe8ILaj5tfJod7i+Btz2xKrRLFsTwJ5tKk+qgu9zC5U/hqSWVX63A1HrIKrSYSSfbbVxqxtWzcyjYJrgX8q8NY9DfbfSkDDa7fyxsRuZAbGigsrdZ3F/ K2D07aiHiSfEXYFz5rwEKvgzs/KYWt09Qvq8ockoYk9NaRHGJrRy94xBxXq+kZaIgJCM5oTzYYOQvzIqoOuvbw==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rats/CtQ7OInRZ35LiasJFuSaNVFPqIk>
Subject: Re: [Rats] EAT claims needed by TEEP
X-BeenThere: rats@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Remote ATtestation procedureS <rats.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rats>, <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rats/>
List-Post: <mailto:rats@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats>, <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 21:06:58 -0000

> On Oct 29, 2020, at 1:45 PM, Thomas Fossati <Thomas.Fossati@arm.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Laurence,
>  
> > My understanding is that they are always encoded as CBOR text strings,
> > so floating-point doesn’t mean #7.25 or such.
>  
> Correct.  In (Co)SWID software-version is just a text string and version-scheme
> is there to do some semantic polishing.  But the underlying type is always #3.
>  
> Maybe I’m misunderstanding your proposal here, but I would be circumspect
> in mixing SWIDs attributes, which are scoped to software artifacts, with HW
> identifiers.

Hi Thomas,

All the SW Version stuff would fall under a single EAT claims that contains a full CoSWID.

For HW Version, I was thinking of two EAT claims, one for the version text, another for the version scheme (or we could go off and define a full CoHWID).

LL

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email