IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rats] draft-ietf-rats-architecture-12

Thomas Fossati <tho.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 02 November 2021 09:11 UTC

Return-Path: <tho.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 880953A0FD9 for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 02:11:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 7dSDwWwJNraN for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 02:11:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22b.google.com (mail-lj1-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22b]) (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 EF7D33A0FD6 for <rats@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 02:11:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22b.google.com with SMTP id j5so1180120lja.9 for <rats@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 02:11:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=6DdU0xatrE32mWO9GFTvM5JpKAXRVUwSLMFqgJzIXb8=; b=XR0nEx0hX+LAHGqcsqa6s34B6gAif2tK2y1+kWktkWuJ45YixwGrI0Kcwhx2Q661O9 J9QMyNbT4c+NPueulz8Is77dpZvo6U577oC4u+sARqZ7DegOk6kSpy2OukH/kmYLYDOw ZCWkjF+oGkvzE2G2mqN9bhAWy8fH+PUT4/XVlwevXQ2E6J9z3kwGW6tDm/Ckt1BM0hrd ccRiKWXE5Zb6MuiXORIrafa0Kvp37pzIYWjMTX+JenBV1Sc/Jn1WbPsk3HAA++o+CEBQ 4bjFoM4z3LtHgMRQn2coWajMVTZ9Yo/FlSvswiwS30UGXR3lUUw67wIdVX0hUdIO6t3V eLrw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6DdU0xatrE32mWO9GFTvM5JpKAXRVUwSLMFqgJzIXb8=; b=UiPvTVJisq41h0sloyoMMmQ3oqZqdaNtGVC59rW0SPBNsB1EcpY2gcqnaYvFhdEjg8 VyuE6ntQELSmGGL8CeaTrtX2GUTOswyIEH+B2XfnTlRutrXEnM0GBZMFsGvUpR920Cj4 XFvBNqDs5vGYHEtWxA1gru9KFXUSyx/v/CtVWuJIMqvg+c14UQwDELp9qnuKHQJayJeo yJpyuczyzrqAVpKBi2/VfQ1hiiuKpQrUltYN3j/88RSicqD3Vwe9jJ4IL3WVOyz5Hnt/ 7h/GXQVtiEXAGF0iwJg4C2wISBr1jTNFioTF/PtofvBE8LdReGyvOFNYU503lJqNlLc9 2lFg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5322yQ40Z7Zj3fGBzqBHrPzGWlPqi3XWZJWkqQXS20nxkKCFIm9d 23HEO/9/LyPiK5n4hr+rL7wH0LfosD5bMSzzXp8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyJXOPM5oDY5DhyL9p14mpCdyeixcpc8Yvp84HXjhHuN15EsajtPAuhHUA16SMwWuAhsWcrUPmdy+STr3psMT8=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b88b:: with SMTP id r11mr15238808ljp.474.1635844260440; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 02:11:00 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CADZyTk=ZbSUYxywzVONYjo59JVf56r8kAhpKqtXgE2=k2uZ5uA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADZyTk=ZbSUYxywzVONYjo59JVf56r8kAhpKqtXgE2=k2uZ5uA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Thomas Fossati <tho.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2021 09:10:49 +0000
Message-ID: <CAObGJnN6wiXg5iamO1BXvms11BymVfRMdEMHsU14xdCrr5wXxw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: rats@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000d2d6305cfcaacf7"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rats/RF1a9IEf3sLGZgOM6ydXO_Q0xiw>
Subject: Re: [Rats] draft-ietf-rats-architecture-12
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: Tue, 02 Nov 2021 09:11:08 -0000

hi Daniel,

quick reply on just one point:

On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 8:59 PM Daniel Migault <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
wrote:section 10.

>
> All timekeeping methods seem to me to have an implicit period when the
> information is valid - I am basically thinking of it as a TTL. Using Epoch
> ID, I have the impression that a new ID indicates a new time slot, so I am
> wondering if blocking the time distributor does not keep the device into
> the past and makes possible replay attacks.
>

Yes. That and a few other threats associated with manipulating the Epoch ID
timeline are discussed in Section 12.3 [1]

Let us know if something is missing.

Cheers, thanks!

[1]
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-rats-architecture-12#section-12.3

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email