Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-dime-erp-16

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Wed, 23 January 2013 08:20 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.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 A8A1C21F85DC; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 00:20:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.588
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.588 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.011, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id R6EWhfwVf5bb; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 00:20:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from av-tac-bru.cisco.com (weird-brew.cisco.com [144.254.15.118]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E4EC21F8816; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 00:20:19 -0800 (PST)
X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned
Received: from strange-brew.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-bru.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r0N8KHPk013333; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:20:17 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [10.60.67.84] (ams-bclaise-8913.cisco.com [10.60.67.84]) by strange-brew.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r0N8JelC013744; Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:20:01 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <50FF9D1C.9070501@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:19:40 +0100
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vincent Roca <vincent.roca@inria.fr>
References: <939DADEE-28DB-4A4B-AD0D-057AEB863250@inria.fr>
In-Reply-To: <939DADEE-28DB-4A4B-AD0D-057AEB863250@inria.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: IESG IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-dime-erp.all@tools.ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-dime-erp-16
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
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: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 08:20:22 -0000

Dear draft-ietf-dime-erp authors,

Please address the concerns below.

Regards, Benoit
> Hello,
>
> 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.
>
> --
>
> Since the security section has not really been updated since version 14, the comments I made at
> that time are still valid. Basically:
>
> The security section of this document only refers to the security section of 4 related documents.
> This is all the more annoying as draft-ietf-dime-erp introduces new mechanisms (and potentially
> new threats and issues). What should I understand? Is the proposal guaranteed to be secure, have
> all the potential weaknesses been already addressed in the 4 related documents? I can not
> conclude after reading the security section.
>
> One more point. In introduction, the authors say:
> "  Security considerations for this key distribution are detailed in Salowey, et al. [RFC5295]."
> This reference is not mentioned in the Security Section!
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>      Vincent
>
>