IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rats] [sacm] CoSWID and EAT and CWT

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 28 November 2019 08:31 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@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 70E7C120058 for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 00:31:45 -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 l8YmNssyWTkV for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 00:31:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [176.58.120.209]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1AA4120048 for <rats@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 00:31:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dooku.sandelman.ca (unknown [185.201.63.254]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E66D31F47D for <rats@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 08:31:40 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dooku.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id A57041189; Thu, 28 Nov 2019 16:23:34 +0800 (+08)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "rats@ietf.org" <rats@ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <2bc157dd-deb6-9fb8-40b4-7e10722545e6@sit.fraunhofer.de>
References: <2A12D8A3-722A-44D1-8011-218C89C8B50B@island-resort.com> <VI1PR08MB5360236E3583EBD3A78085EDFA490@VI1PR08MB5360.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <60C4E362-02FD-4DDF-BFB4-D09D358282D4@arm.com> <b5bca8a7-7e7c-4432-a1be-6cf1fc21c352@sit.fraunhofer.de> <05D67FD7-B95E-4716-B844-2F2F3A09030F@arm.com> <BB362412-1C0B-4BF6-99FF-6BE210C939B5@arm.com> <2bc157dd-deb6-9fb8-40b4-7e10722545e6@sit.fraunhofer.de>
Comments: In-reply-to Henk Birkholz <henk.birkholz@sit.fraunhofer.de> message dated "Wed, 27 Nov 2019 18:27:21 +0100."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 09:23:34 +0100
Message-ID: <20047.1574929414@dooku.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rats/y_uqgjDFluTe2xr2AkkzHY-I3OY>
Subject: Re: [Rats] [sacm] CoSWID and EAT and CWT
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: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 08:31:45 -0000

Henk Birkholz <henk.birkholz@sit.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
    > to your first point: I am not sure what legacy systems that would be able to
    > create/process EAT would not be able to process a SUIT manifest. Could you
    > elaborate on that?

I think that an example is in your hand, a smartphone.
I think that their boot/recovery roms do not process SUIT today, but it would
be possible to generate measurements in EAT format as to what is running
if the measurements are available.

    > I'd maybe not call that a dependency, but rather synergy
    > in data models, but I am under the suspicion that I simply don't understand
    > the scenario that you are talking about.

I think that the synnergy makes sense to me.
Just because we describe what is running using SUIT terminology and
constructs does not mean that we have use the entire Manifest.


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email