IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rats] CWT and JWT are good enough?

Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 16 September 2019 15:45 UTC

Return-Path: <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.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 9045D12081D for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 08:45:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 U7YfsUbYvTGW for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 08:45:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-x336.google.com (mail-ot1-x336.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::336]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE5DF12012A for <rats@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 08:45:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-x336.google.com with SMTP id s22so260263otr.6 for <rats@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 08:45:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=J9R5rPHLwlvUAVrSozs8kuJ2+pSKjRfb7RfWVULfAMs=; b=KL/irNgev0XiZ5jqwoUtG//oTo7Jn0x2LnfWIPh1RfWFT2qHhcOuJM9/h9TSg19XvR t7n2taByQTjVym5+GEZfZ6dq1osbNQWQz4ieHrCWvPgup1MsL4BQq/F0xXPD3lRmNF6I NCleRx/+Nrus3qNcO/i2EuVU/15FqA9WkMh3CBnHNVh4nzBGI+ztZ89GU+AEejgsomDt 2spWDQpMSmHgFdCnSVZs0hDh506OYqHzeyM68d4usxZLj/F5B0udUsR9GNcbLPzn/Akl 4u19/4saVf2ea5XA/aP60aS9j3LCHg6fX/rpMTFq6l6GzNiSAbrlN51TcvtTv89Vlb4U QbAw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=J9R5rPHLwlvUAVrSozs8kuJ2+pSKjRfb7RfWVULfAMs=; b=DrtL4+3drJkCp33EMEUv17FDHTOSqL09nx9MMPb/v6h82SQ9aCkjLg8FTSnSchgTww 1ghZ6ikzDLfX7pSWUo7QIPMCUkwxFhiLQFeGQz/i64QwGNvOu7/dmqOcV2YCTpiJnkpg 8sAuR8rVC3jxFEwl7mTYTYpVF7GVTQXZyN5+zWx4FknNLP18IVVARc3qbZ5jGpHLgXOG W5aCP0u3EjC6WkOkNg/ecFPMUQ9ZmwUX6AjswB4ioQHX+2FU2URP+Yn6VhYmP+ACfoUe 1MX4gSrierAgQvWzd+YqK+fkMF0CGqRcdreINL4I6dHcCOV1GaaP6SWcNj2DsSJ9EWa/ PmTQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU7aDabJPSGJxxjDNNTiqADfpOMr9ckQuCwBzZ7CHCuJgy1LSi2 UJ4EqLdUTCopVOKXa0zZOhTlc3My34AOZPXAaFnzlVtD
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwIVjQenjvzxqWhK5d+j8b62pWlLNf+k2w7jdo4QtszOvRRNOrxbPxm7Fx8AdGKoLJqma15vyWQxIfU9MI1lNg=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:1bd4:: with SMTP id v20mr5928022ota.151.1568648721252; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 08:45:21 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CDC992AE-B6DB-4BAE-975F-6E2BF9ED2C97@island-resort.com>
In-Reply-To: <CDC992AE-B6DB-4BAE-975F-6E2BF9ED2C97@island-resort.com>
From: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:44:45 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHbuEH4fisaDTKOzEY2ZEfxiVyfZ4wYibdRzQUYxq4i8a8G_WQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com>
Cc: rats@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000cec4750592ad7d73"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rats/GfWHfNCBc92idaLPZiXXK57UsSg>
Subject: Re: [Rats] CWT and JWT are good enough?
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: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 15:45:25 -0000

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 11:30 AM Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com>
wrote:

> I’ve been trying to take the position to avoid even minor divergences from
> CWT and JWT in EAT. I wish there wasn’t inconsistency between the two,
> particularly in how the claims registry is handled. That inconsistency has
> already consumed many hours, even days, of this WG. There’s been some
> really long email threads about it.
>
> Fixing it only for EAT seems half-baked. Fixing it for all of CWT and JWT
> would have to go through those WGs. Seems like a lot of work. We have
> enough to do, so I’m inclined to live with it.
>

The COSE WG is the one the decided to diverge from lessons learned.  That
WG is open again, so if you'd like to pose this problem somewhere, that
would be the place to do it.  I'm guessing people thought one or the other
would be used, but not both resulting in this issue of inconsistency we are
seeing.

Best regards,
Kathleen


>
> LL
> _______________________________________________
> RATS mailing list
> RATS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats
>


-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email