Re: [saag] Common labeled security (comment on CALIPSO, labeled NFSv4)

Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com> Mon, 06 April 2009 16:13 UTC

Return-Path: <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com>
X-Original-To: saag@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: saag@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 756073A6CF0; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 09:13:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.816
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.816 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.230, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HPEt4fH6SJfe; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 09:13:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com (brmea-mail-4.Sun.COM [192.18.98.36]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25B7928C230; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 09:11:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dm-central-02.central.sun.com ([129.147.62.5]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n36GCoIo005536; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 16:12:50 GMT
Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (binky.Central.Sun.COM [129.153.128.104]) by dm-central-02.central.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n36GCnXC057339; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 10:12:50 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n36FB2g8004433; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 10:11:02 -0500 (CDT)
Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n36FB10N004432; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 10:11:01 -0500 (CDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: binky.Central.Sun.COM: nw141292 set sender to Nicolas.Williams@sun.com using -f
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2009 10:11:01 -0500
From: Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com>
To: Sean Turner <turners@ieca.com>
Message-ID: <20090406151100.GP1500@Sun.COM>
References: <20090402154402.GM1500@Sun.COM> <FAD1CF17F2A45B43ADE04E140BA83D48A9FF82@scygexch1.cygnacom.com> <20090403154253.GZ1500@Sun.COM> <FAD1CF17F2A45B43ADE04E140BA83D48A9FF9E@scygexch1.cygnacom.com> <20090403173655.GK1500@Sun.COM> <FAD1CF17F2A45B43ADE04E140BA83D48A9FFAF@scygexch1.cygnacom.com> <20090403191838.GM1500@Sun.COM> <FAD1CF17F2A45B43ADE04E140BA83D48A9FFBE@scygexch1.cygnacom.com> <20090403195704.GT1500@Sun.COM> <49D80922.9050700@ieca.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <49D80922.9050700@ieca.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i
Cc: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov, labeled-nfs@linux-nfs.org, nfsv4@ietf.org, saag@ietf.org, nfs-discuss@opensolaris.org, Santosh Chokhani <SChokhani@cygnacom.com>
Subject: Re: [saag] Common labeled security (comment on CALIPSO, labeled NFSv4)
X-BeenThere: saag@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Advisory Group <saag.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/saag>
List-Post: <mailto:saag@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 16:13:06 -0000

On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 09:28:02PM -0400, Sean Turner wrote:
> I usually try to find the corresponding ITU spec because I think ITU 
> gives out all of it's ASN.1 modules freely?  Anyway, here's a link to 
> the ITU-T X.841 Spec:
> http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/asn1/database/itu-t/x/x841/2000/index.html

Thanks.  I'm sure the spec needs to be read too, not just the ASN.1
module (it's mostly self-evident, but some types, like
LabelAndCertValue, require an explanation).

> The one thing that's missing from the module is definitions for security 
> categories.  Some suggested categories were defined in Annex B, but it's 
> an informative annex so there's no ASN.1 freely available (they wouldn't 
> allow them in the normative text/module).  Those categories are based on 
> FIPS 188 (the syntax is not the same).
> 
> Note that some of the syntax for labels has made it's way to some 
> IDs/RFCs notably RFC 2634.

Thanks.  That's very useful.

Nico
--