Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-eman-applicability-statement-08

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

On 30/11/2014 01:02, Melinda Shore wrote:
> 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.
>
> Summary: Security considerations section is insufficient.  Otherwise
> the document is in pretty good shape (with nits).
>
> This document is essentially a set of use cases guiding the energy
> management's (eman) working group's work, as well as providing a
> description of the relationship of the IETF's eman's framework to
> other relevant energy monitoring standards.
>
> Of particular interest, perhaps, is that eman is using SNMP to convey
> energy device information.
>
> The use cases are very clearly described, and we're grateful for
> the "essential properties" breakout summaries ("target devices,"
> "how powered," and "reporting") at the bottom of each use case.
>
> All that said, I was extremely surprised to get to the "Security
> considerations" section and find that it consisted of but two
> generic sentences about SNMP.
Note that there is some text in the framework itself.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7326#section-10

Regards, Benoit
> We are all aware of issues related
> to the sensitivity of the electric grid, and powered devices,
> to security vulnerabilities and that this is a time of heightened
> scrutiny of how the grid is secured.  This necessarily extends to
> monitoring, and there is certainly a *lot* of information that
> may be gleaned by an attacker from monitoring power consumption,
> as well as manipulation of the grid by an attacker inserting
> bogus monitoring messages.
>
> There does not appear to have been any work done within the
> group on developing a threat model for energy monitoring, which
> strikes me as problematic.  However, even in the absence of an
> interest in developing one, a quick summary of the sorts of
> attacks that must be considered in the development and deployment
> of energy monitoring mechanisms strikes me as far, far, far
> more useful than a one-sentence rundown of generic security mechanisms
> provided by SNMPv3.
>
> Minor comments:
>
> 1) This is more by way of guidance, but it should be noted that
>     while the information model may be portable to YANG, netconf,
>     and others, the security models and technologies used to secure
>     those protocols may be (and are) different, and security
>     properties need to be given serious consideration before
>     moving the information model to another conveyance.
>
> 2) the I-D nit checker found a number of problems in the references,
>     as well as a few other problems.
> https://tools.ietf.org/idnits?url=https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-eman-applicability-statement-08.txt
>
> Trivial nits:
>
> 1) In section 1.2, the document name/reference should be separated
>     from the document description by a colon and space
>
> 2) In that same section there's a stray period at the very bottom of
>     page 4
>
> 3) Section 2, first paragraph:  "This section a presents energy
>     management scenarios [ ... ]".  That 'a' (third word) needs to be
>     removed.
>
> 4) For some reason the section header for section 2.8 does not appear
>     bolded, while those for other subsections do.
>
>
> Melinda
> .
>