[secdir] Secdir review: draft-polk-ipr-disclosure-03

"Hilarie Orman" <hilarie@purplestreak.com> Thu, 17 May 2012 19:58 UTC

Return-Path: <hilarie@purplestreak.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 999C621F87C8; Thu, 17 May 2012 12:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.11
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.11 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dfWG2fVChj7X; Thu, 17 May 2012 12:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com (out01.mta.xmission.com [166.70.13.231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22EC121F87C7; Thu, 17 May 2012 12:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx03.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.213]) by out01.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <hilarie@purplestreak.com>) id 1SV6ps-00027j-FC; Thu, 17 May 2012 13:58:08 -0600
Received: from 166-70-57-249.ip.xmission.com ([166.70.57.249] helo=sylvester.rhmr.com) by mx03.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <hilarie@purplestreak.com>) id 1SV6pp-0001jJ-MJ; Thu, 17 May 2012 13:58:08 -0600
Received: from sylvester.rhmr.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sylvester.rhmr.com (8.14.4/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id q4HJv7Zf023357; Thu, 17 May 2012 13:57:07 -0600
Received: (from hilarie@localhost) by sylvester.rhmr.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id q4HJv79J023351; Thu, 17 May 2012 13:57:07 -0600
Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 13:57:07 -0600
Message-Id: <201205171957.q4HJv79J023351@sylvester.rhmr.com>
From: "Hilarie Orman" <hilarie@purplestreak.com>
To: iesg@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org
X-XM-SPF: eid=; ; ; mid=; ; ; hst=mx03.mta.xmission.com; ; ; ip=166.70.57.249; ; ; frm=hilarie@purplestreak.com; ; ; spf=none
X-XM-DomainKey: sender_domain=purplestreak.com; ; ; sender=hilarie@purplestreak.com; ; ; status=error
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 166.70.57.249
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: hilarie@purplestreak.com
X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa06 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1
X-Spam-Combo: *;iesg@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org
X-Spam-Relay-Country:
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Fri, 06 Aug 2010 16:31:04 -0600)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mx03.mta.xmission.com)
Subject: [secdir] Secdir review: draft-polk-ipr-disclosure-03
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Hilarie Orman <hilarie@purplestreak.com>
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 19:58:09 -0000

Security-relate comments re
Promoting Compliance with Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Disclosure Rules

Do not be alarmed.  I have reviewed this document as part of the
security directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents
being processed by the IESG.  These comments were written primarily
for the benefit of the security area directors.  Document editors and
WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call
comments.

The document describes strategies for promoting compliance with the
IETF's IPR disclosure rules.

I tried hard to find a security angle.  Perhaps sensitive IPR
disclosures could be public-key encoded and placed under a timed
release system?

Otherwise, I found no security concerns.

Hilarie