Re: [Rats] using symmetric keys in an Endorsement/Verifier flow

"Smith, Ned" <ned.smith@intel.com> Mon, 08 February 2021 18:32 UTC

IronPort-SDR: UXh0uo17MkpFGDRXeYTONiIMn0IOV/ilmfyPIEfEmzkPJ9b+SO2jIisJpGr3rf6rq7EI3YYgtC 9veHrofb3h2w==
IronPort-SDR: oRNgicSOS7hq0WJqtl0yRYxKlMdeiPgkHjdTg5Z+6h0dxwvFl9Khh/oKHATMMk70s+oOa9fwrS dxwF2mqqnjZg==
From: "Smith, Ned" <ned.smith@intel.com>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>, "rats@ietf.org" <rats@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Rats] using symmetric keys in an Endorsement/Verifier flow
Thread-Index: AQHW/Ad87nuluAxRZkKVUBhhoyzKFapOE1gA
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2021 18:32:29 +0000
Message-ID: <FC34391E-023A-416B-BD43-39371C8A43D2@intel.com>
References: <31999.1612560697@localhost> <1568.1612561139@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <1568.1612561139@localhost>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.45.21011103
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <B0A13F53D3FBB0498B17B77D62E1E398@namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 013d215c-fa93-4bdc-e6a8-08d8cc5fe448
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 08 Feb 2021 18:32:29.5712 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 46c98d88-e344-4ed4-8496-4ed7712e255d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 8vELu4upExOGWpoV9KNUzqgjD01dnkvWFT/KFFzHbT3zmjRip26XmB4IwIRKrM2uU7DYT7LHhF6U4wBemg2ubg==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MW3PR11MB4586
X-OriginatorOrg: intel.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rats/fD7MRVnlwuD354SNP4oPUWHWg0o>
Subject: Re: [Rats] using symmetric keys in an Endorsement/Verifier flow
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, 08 Feb 2021 18:32:35 -0000

+1 "Endorsements with symmetric verification keys should write another document"

This is a reason to re-charter. It would allow drafts that address the corner of the diagram that was ruled out of scope during chartering discussion to be written and adopted as a way to clarify content that isn't appropriate to include in an architecture draft.

-Ned

On 2/5/21, 1:40 PM, "RATS on behalf of Michael Richardson" <rats-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of mcr@sandelman.ca> wrote:


    In https://github.com/ietf-rats-wg/architecture/issues/162 it was argued that
    we needed to be clear that:

      "Endorsements should have confidentiality protection when carrying
      symmetric verification keys. "

    but, many of the Architecture Design Team didn't feel that the architecture
    was intended to provide any kind of specification on Endorsements.
    Within the dataflow diagram:
      https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-rats-architecture-09.html#dataflow
      (attached below, for those who use a fixed-width font)
    That only the "Evidence" and "Attestation Results", which are between
    solid-lined entities was really in scope.  That the rest was for future
    documents.

    We felt that this requirement went into the Design Requirements which the
    IETF usually tries to stay out of, sticking to Functional Requirements.
    Further, we felt that the Functional Requirements in the RATS Architecture
    should not even cover Endorsements.
    At least, not in this edition of the document.

    The recommendation is that those who need to do Endorsements with symmetric
    verifification keys should write another document in which this topic would
    get adequately dealt with.



      ************   *************    ************    *****************
      * Endorser *   * Reference *    * Verifier *    * Relying Party *
      ************   * Value     *    *  Owner   *    *  Owner        *
         |           * Provider  *    ************    *****************
         |           *************          |                 |
         |                  |               |                 |
         |Endorsements      |Reference      |Appraisal        |Appraisal
         |                  |Values         |Policy           |Policy for
         |                  |               |for              |Attestation
         .-----------.      |               |Evidence         |Results
                     |      |               |                 |
                     |      |               |                 |
                     v      v               v                 |
                   .---------------------------.              |
            .----->|          Verifier         |------.       |
            |      '---------------------------'      |       |
            |                                         |       |
            |                              Attestation|       |
            |                              Results    |       |
            | Evidence                                |       |
            |                                         |       |
            |                                         v       v
      .----------.                                .---------------.
      | Attester |                                | Relying Party |
      '----------'                                '---------------'

[Rats] how does the Verifier work Michael Richardson
[Rats] using symmetric keys in an Endorsement/Ver… Michael Richardson
Re: [Rats] how does the Verifier work Henk Birkholz
Re: [Rats] using symmetric keys in an Endorsement… Smith, Ned
Re: [Rats] using symmetric keys in an Endorsement… Laurence Lundblade
Re: [Rats] how does the Verifier work Simon Frost
Re: [Rats] using symmetric keys in an Endorsement… Russ Housley