IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [saag] Discuss at SAAG? was Re: nation state crypto profiles - draft-jenkins-cnsa-cmc-profile-00

Carl Wallace <carl@redhoundsoftware.com> Tue, 02 October 2018 20:41 UTC

Return-Path: <carl@redhoundsoftware.com>
X-Original-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2484C131141 for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 13:41:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhoundsoftware.com
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 kCiHk-OTOLHn for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 13:41:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x82d.google.com (mail-qt1-x82d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21D62131107 for <saag@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 13:41:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x82d.google.com with SMTP id q40-v6so3582627qte.0 for <saag@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Oct 2018 13:41:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhoundsoftware.com; s=google; h=user-agent:date:subject:from:to:message-id:thread-topic:references :in-reply-to:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2IVQHRaNTVLFbt1qfyMZ7xGtv3cQYNswAqYJvroe1Io=; b=rztDDwLWaOqC04cYYX+w0MWqnbtZsqh78rMoDhDA5IHyNx9f3ayLan6bV6Qfw+7VFH XNKJ3+TCicLlbCmmeVcH5CR0CMqR05LuXSILfwQQ2Orb4PUCF8MghIDIG2uqpyC5SMiL BrpEO30cmbrNKbn+hGqcnCXBPfIZrnucPYfwM=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:user-agent:date:subject:from:to:message-id :thread-topic:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=2IVQHRaNTVLFbt1qfyMZ7xGtv3cQYNswAqYJvroe1Io=; b=PlIOhLRdSeDpfk276JU/2/Di//8o9SCklNJJKe10GeYfU3U6kdVf1jcpb08XiF6Ma5 4q7J9BnV5v0Jiqp+avxQ+S1bloKPBR/g773LmrsiPRqwVtMKO9+qneuweW4RF4ZrLh1x 2MqXvxhqI4NU5UDkVV3XQYO6Ffytg8IEXRFNZIW6InoCelvnVsmdh+oM6gF38fP/3fGL YQlPBZlWJx8h16pawmT4JWPgvLGROJxgTp+uU97lEKTuDi2ncEVU5LHr6Jyc3Za8h3ol qwrEO+85YQB8G6rzGyVdq2Wvl3SZnbQ+8N/WxUkTMA4UZSGFkzS0IVpjoWtfomrZsE7M NJqA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfoj+A0KDTQedTGjeVGjg4ka+IVU6s2Dl8Kx4iUtrUP5TfpPkzM+/ 0LBe5eaNJAC16eS0tdc9TKq9Kyh/H1iUNQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV62MDnOMYHDaWW4rrgrCNYC8BnrHJQNvxSSdg7f5Elw/vOsX2RwcQcXOCmxH19FQQ1hc3D1+3Q==
X-Received: by 2002:aed:2b43:: with SMTP id p61-v6mr14462296qtd.107.1538512872251; Tue, 02 Oct 2018 13:41:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.246] (pool-108-28-91-61.washdc.fios.verizon.net. [108.28.91.61]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id v5-v6sm656565qkf.26.2018.10.02.13.41.10 (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Oct 2018 13:41:11 -0700 (PDT)
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.7.6.170621
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2018 16:41:06 -0400
From: Carl Wallace <carl@redhoundsoftware.com>
To: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>, saag@ietf.org
Message-ID: <D7D94F2D.C22E0%carl@redhoundsoftware.com>
Thread-Topic: [saag] Discuss at SAAG? was Re: nation state crypto profiles - draft-jenkins-cnsa-cmc-profile-00
References: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1810021055160.25461@bofh.nohats.ca>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1810021055160.25461@bofh.nohats.ca>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/saag/kE5177695Le40SJU6HbuluyvhTo>
Subject: Re: [saag] Discuss at SAAG? was Re: nation state crypto profiles - draft-jenkins-cnsa-cmc-profile-00
X-BeenThere: saag@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Advisory Group <saag.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 02 Oct 2018 20:41:15 -0000

What's the difference between a nation state profile and a similar or same
profile that has been marshaled through a commercial entity?
What's the difference between a nation state profile and a profile from a
very large company? Is a market cap limit next?
Would elimination of all affiliation flatten the space in a good way or is
the current truth in packaging preferred?

On 10/2/18, 10:57 AM, "saag on behalf of Paul Wouters"
<saag-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of paul@nohats.ca> wrote:

>
>I think this group is a better discussion place for this item.
>
>Can we add this to the agenda for Bangkok to discuss?
>
>Paul
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 15:40:46
>From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
>Cc: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
>To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
>Subject: Re: nation state crypto profiles -
>draft-jenkins-cnsa-cmc-profile-00
>
>On Fri, 28 Sep 2018, Russ Housley wrote:
>
>> That thread came to the conclusion that the IETF should not process
>>profiles
>> for any nations states.   In my opinion, there is value in making it
>>easy for
>> implementers to find such profiles.  So, if the Independent Stream
>>Editor is
>> willing to process such profiles, they can be published as RFCs, which
>>would
>> not consume any resources from the IETF leadership.
>
>I do not agree the thread came to that conclusion. I see people
>disagreed and stop the discussion, because everyone agreed the
>draft in question to make Suite B historic was not disputed.
>
>People outside the IETF do not understand the subtleties of different
>IETF streams, and having an RFC is seen as a stamp of approval of
>the international community. Therefore, I do indeed believe we should
>not make the same mistake again.
>
>The USG seems to be doing a fine job making FIPS publications available
>without these being enshrined in RFCs.
>
>I am against the IETF publishing CNSA or any other nation state
>cryptography profiles.
>
>Paul
>
>_______________________________________________
>saag mailing list
>saag@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email