IETF Logo Mail Archive

[sacm] CoSWID and EAT and CWT

Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com> Thu, 21 November 2019 00:34 UTC

Return-Path: <lgl@island-resort.com>
X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 851361208AC for <sacm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 16:34:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 jlMfPDLxUBJE for <sacm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 16:34:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p3plsmtpa08-03.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plsmtpa08-03.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [173.201.193.104]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34B3C1200B5 for <sacm@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 16:34:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-94ba.meeting.ietf.org ([31.133.148.186]) by :SMTPAUTH: with ESMTPA id XaQtis3yCsalvXaQuiCgA9; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 17:34:53 -0700
From: Laurence Lundblade <lgl@island-resort.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_84C47E89-9D40-47FF-8873-6668659E3810"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
Message-Id: <2A12D8A3-722A-44D1-8011-218C89C8B50B@island-resort.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 08:34:50 +0800
To: sacm@ietf.org, rats@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfGFB8zJSNCa1cnvRtvxEe/M/OqmrZ68ODfoFUznc/AYTpuo5z4bMzmVJDErql4qpr5ndMnt38x9ZUFci8x2MKorFspVz/LSv/nycCziiw5skOKtxanDR r7VsMasXE3cm0C+zWH3e9M3U43XiIWxR9wTpd1iafHQcdPuveCtBUWWUV8xblm9TUmhmwjdfyqCmw4Ouj55oq2TJ/7LyJpaan/Y=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sacm/xIcbFAtuNWe2K1vpdNdnfNHGm-4>
Subject: [sacm] CoSWID and EAT and CWT
X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: SACM WG mail list <sacm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sacm>, <mailto:sacm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sacm/>
List-Post: <mailto:sacm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sacm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm>, <mailto:sacm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 00:34:55 -0000

Hi,

I’m not on the SACM list, but did look at the archive. Hopefully I’m not out of sync.

My thought is to register one claim for CWT that is an entire CoSWID (in CDDL the concise-swid-tag).

That way CoSWID can grow and develop on its own without lots of adds and subtracts to the CWT registry. It has its own IANA registry with its own experts and such. Seems like the coupling / factoring is about right.

This would also be the way I’d like to have it in EAT attestation. We’ve done a mini version of this with the location claim <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rats-eat-01#section-3.8>.

Then if you just want to sign a CoSWID CWT style, this works pretty well too. It has a slight overhead compared to having all the CoSWID data items as direct CWT claims in that it will have an additional map layer, but that is only about three bytes.

LL

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email