IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rats] Requesting a Nonce from a Verifier

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 05 March 2024 18:36 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 5ED35C14F61F for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 10:36:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.106 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Gf1pXQxeeajk for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 10:35:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3578AC14F5ED for <rats@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 10:35:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDBEB38993; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 13:35:54 -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 26LWeTztlP9j; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 13:35:53 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 723C538991; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 13:35:53 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1709663753; bh=yEDLwwGjDM5ufip/L9Iwm/QEjJ/qCMjVDg1dffgsUgg=; h=From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=VYP9QhyotPIx3ZHuzNeseQFmdo0sNd11rBj4tbpwNgSrmYvcAVlB9ZRwkz1Qnid7r bryJo+shbeXf56b3YRpWue8Qe6i/7vIvCpKGhfRgsVnRrQwjTU/oxPIob8cTi9cRna fA6vqnsXzkIcDaa1G6CKkFYMIyGu4fUBeEQ2r74unD/x6i+x0nqvxNGp/1j9izxguh n8EzpNAqWM0A9etz6M6iVfnaaZYI9NZg251AhPCbOvjb6iM7qZJnVBgVrydrzbbWJz A2UQ3Resoiq2Ap7yCCfQeEA9T0tmOblGOVt4H3Dow8tWRiQaO8OzoJMRxEXmKD6IR3 u+9bSPNX4ygeA==
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DC2D599; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 13:35:53 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries>
cc: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>, "Smith, Ned" <ned.smith@intel.com>, Henk Birkholz <henk.birkholz@ietf.contact>, rats <rats@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAN8C-_LH+oeMRUuEZrWr1Ksn53CuFL2qx6V1pAwZ59-ZgmSg2g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <02c501da6987$d2d64490$7882cdb0$@gmx.net> <ecf9ac86-82f2-80b7-160a-bdde42387ef0@ietf.contact> <2E3E84DF-F528-420D-BB70-B6E23FEE0978@intel.com> <CAN8C-_LO+J+gj3=RutGiyxzpvint3Jb40-OwEEraGht-1dhdBw@mail.gmail.com> <010201da6d59$dc8a9ec0$959fdc40$@gmx.net> <CAN8C-_LH+oeMRUuEZrWr1Ksn53CuFL2qx6V1pAwZ59-ZgmSg2g@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.8+dev; GNU Emacs 28.2
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: Tue, 05 Mar 2024 13:35:53 -0500
Message-ID: <29743.1709663753@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rats/gVEthVJHJMK7b9lYghiOdinT-H0>
Subject: Re: [Rats] Requesting a Nonce from a Verifier
X-BeenThere: rats@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 05 Mar 2024 18:36:01 -0000

Orie Steele <orie@transmute.industries> wrote:
    > The wallet proves possession of the license, the issuer provides a
    > fresh proof of non revocation, and then later (within some validity
    > period window for the status attestation) the wallet can present both
    > the credential and the proof of non suspension, even to an offline
    > verifier.

Does the verifier have to contact the issuer to determine if
the non-revocation proof is valid?    If that part a symmetric encryption
from the issuer, or an assymetric signed statement?   I guess I am confusing
the nonce with the fresh-proof of non-revocation.


--
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