Re: [secdir] SECDIR review of draft-turner-encryptedkeypackagecontenttype-01

[Sean Turner <[e-mail]>]

Chris Lonvick wrote:
> Hi Sean,
> 
> All looks good.  One comment in-line.
> 
> On Mon, 12 Apr 2010, Sean Turner wrote:
>> WRT the use of the unprotected attribute: The attribute is used to
>> identify a key that was previously distributed.  This kind of 
>> mechanism is used in EcnryptedData as well as in certificates (e.g., 
>> subject key and authority key identifiers).  I looked for some wording 
>> from other RFCs that used this kind of mechanism that I could use in a 
>> security consideration. But, I couldn't find any.  I'm thinking 
>> there's isn't any text because as long as people don't do something 
>> utterly stupid like use the actual key as the identifier there is no 
>> security consideration.
> 
> You're on the same track as I was thinking, but I was thinking of 
> something VERY much more generic.  From RFCs 2797 and 5273,
> 
>    Implementers of this protocol are strongly encouraged to consider
>    generally accepted principles of secure key management when
>    integrating this capability within an overall security architecture.
> 
> (Which is a nice way of saying, "Don't be utterly stoopid!" :-)

I'll add this to the beginning of the considerations.

spt