Re: [Rats] Review of draft-birkholz-rats-daa

[Thomas Fossati <[e-mail]>]

Hi Chris,

Thank you for your explanation.

What I was trying to say, maybe not very clearly, is that if one
decomposes the DAA protocol into its two constituent phases, there seem
to be no need to add the DAA Issuer as an *explicit* role to the current
list [1].  The DAA Issuer can be expressed as a "meta" role that assumes
the RATS Verifier and RATS Endorser roles depending on context.

cheers, t

[1] https://ietf-rats-wg.github.io/architecture/draft-ietf-rats-architecture.html#name-roles

On 06/06/2021, 21:12, "Christopher Newton" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > Is it really necessary to introduce the new "DAA Issuer" role?
> >
> > It seems to me that if the JOIN and SIGN phases are considered as
> > two separate attestation protocols, the Issuer could be mapped to a
> > couple of well-known RATS roles depending on the phase it is
> > involved in:
> > * Verifier for JOIN - plus an authorisation RP on top
> >   that grants the group credentials to the authenticated Attester;
> > * Endorser for SIGN.
>
> Yes, the DAA Issuer is a separate role. it is effectively a
> Certificate Authority for the DAA keys. The difference from a PKI CA
> is that the Verifier uses the public key of the DAA Issuer to directly
> verify the DAA signature. The signer's public key is not available to
> the verifier.
>
> For a TPM, the Endorser is the chip manufacturer who provides a PKI
> certificate for the TPM's endorsement key. However, the endorsement
> key cannot be used as a DAA key as it is an encryption key. it is only
> used to enable the DAA Issuer to authenticate the TPM in a deniable
> way. After the Issuer authenticates the TPM it provides a DAA
> credential to the DAA signing key. The Endorser can take on the role
> of the DAA Issuer, but this is not a requirement.
>
> We hope that this makes things a little clearer, we could add more
> detail in the RATS DAA document if this would help.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris and Liqun.
>
>
> --
> Dr Christopher Newton
> Surrey Centre for Cyber Security
> Department of Computer Science
> University of Surrey
> Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7XH, UK
> --
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Fossati <[e-mail]>
> Sent: 26 May 2021 13:04
> To: [e-mail]
> Cc: [e-mail]; Thomas Fossati <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Review of draft-birkholz-rats-daa
>
> Hi RATS-DAA authors,
>
> I have reviewed draft-birkholz-rats-daa-00 and I think this is a
> useful document, plus it is short and sweet.
>
> I may have a few editorial suggestions, but I'd like to ask one meta
> question first - apologies if this was brought up in previous
> conversations:
>
> Is it really necessary to introduce the new "DAA Issuer" role?
>
> It seems to me that if the JOIN and SIGN phases are considered as two
> separate attestation protocols, the Issuer could be mapped to a couple
> of well-known RATS roles depending on the phase it is involved in:
> * Verifier for JOIN - plus an authorisation RP on top that grants
>   the group credentials to the authenticated Attester;
> * Endorser for SIGN.
>
> Cheers, thank you.
>
> t





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.