IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rats] [Teep] EAT claims needed by TEEP

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Fri, 12 November 2021 22:09 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 61B6A3A1292; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 14:09:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 kBQydHKKXGtI; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 14:09:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C86803A1275; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 14:09:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 449A51802B; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 17:11:48 -0500 (EST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id n9iJ33WfltrK; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 17:11:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D76B118023; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 17:11:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F70440; Fri, 12 Nov 2021 17:09:37 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "rats@ietf.org" <rats@ietf.org>, teep <teep@ietf.org>
cc: Dave Thaler <dthaler=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CH2PR21MB14642063B754CF257EA403CDA3959@CH2PR21MB1464.namprd21.prod.outlook.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> <3370D92E-23C2-41C3-B86F-A65C168E9082@island-resort.com> <AM6PR08MB42311D76B24E866812171BDC9C140@AM6PR08MB4231.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <CH2PR21MB14640330E3DA58D2144659F7A3919@CH2PR21MB1464.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <C9FCDB94-1734-4F6C-B6D9-DDB384827E06@island-resort.com> <CH2PR21MB146427B07435A5F36DAE5782A3919@CH2PR21MB1464.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <27150.1636465193@localhost> <A40BE985-E12E-4B5E-8995-F4408134AEE4@island-resort.com> <398725.1636575788@dooku> <43D84D56-26B1 -4726-A3AC-E918071592BB@island-resort.com> <CH2PR21MB1464E91FD236666F94C3A380A3939@CH2PR21MB1464.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <CAObGJnMh0+GFySpovD-YoSF34o+cMEj-h+NSMUoEiBHT8WadWQ@mail.gmail.com> <21384.1636638211@localhost> <CAN40gSvom7aQ4j5YXx+HX-UNwcsDE6SwiZvWGPjH9YoRY1KpFQ@mail.gmail.com> <CH2PR21MB14642063B754CF257EA403CDA3959@CH2PR21MB1464.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2021 17:09:37 -0500
Message-ID: <11637.1636754977@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rats/K_QH49MITpJmsy4GzcVG_yi_NU8>
Subject: Re: [Rats] [Teep] 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: Fri, 12 Nov 2021 22:09:47 -0000

Dave Thaler <dthaler=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
    > My takeaway is that TEEP (with various participants from SUIT
    > and RATS who weighed in) believes that RATS should define
    > a claim in the EAT spec, but leave the *values* to be defined by
    > profiles and by vendors (i.e., both categories are needed).
    > The TEEP profile would define values used by TEEP use cases,
    > as would other profiles.  Vendors would be able to define
    > vendor-specific values in addition to standard values defined in profiles.

Having missed this morning's party due to conflicts, I'm pleased by this
result.  That's basically what I said.
RATS needs to standardize that there such a claim, but it's not acceptable in
the end for it to be free-for-all.  TEEP needs to be clear as to what is
going to go in.

    > Also TEEP had strong consensus that the values should be opaque
    > not structured.   As such, some believe a UUID would be better
    > than a byte blob or text string because a UUID helps ensure opaqueness,
    > but that's for RATS to decide if RATS defines the claim and requirements
    > for profiles.

I'm all for it being up to TEEP.  I'm okay with UUID.
I would also suggest some kind of PEN-based structure, perhaps based upon a
two element CBOR array like: [ PEN, bstr ]

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email