Re: [secdir] sec-dir review of draft-ietf-payload-rtp-opus-08

Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin@mozilla.com> Wed, 01 April 2015 21:20 UTC

Return-Path: <jmvalin@mozilla.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F1D51A1AD0 for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:20:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable
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 4nsWGo1qH4jf for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:20:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qc0-f180.google.com (mail-qc0-f180.google.com [209.85.216.180]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CCC41A1A75 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:20:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qcbii10 with SMTP id ii10so30122630qcb.2 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Wed, 01 Apr 2015 14:20:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Z5T8XQc4MFWFHv/M5z6CQPxcrhgszA6ou/ADy0N1ZhY=; b=PgDRZjiUXGMLu1dUI9iYFCIqykXDtwDm9oIcdK7EjmN6Q8CyPGAUm8B8VfMG6lJ7BZ 9lGzSgJ3ec39Mwwr2JjMkL9QPQvQ9or54S6bnt1z4nUtleZSeZrA+tt0xtJK7hg96Yp1 n0KdK7NbkJIfjhwxSwXdXBjXTn8gQt+brwxG/2hlhovT3I3tWxvxcbhgsUulS8AZndcV oO5ccCSN4T9gcC0WMZGZkgyiNSg1zy4GiXZTpKoYAOJAIwrEtsILm+Xwd/Qn+77DAYg1 +MSkX6waF/U+NFJ07sYpdTXml/Ggiyv6CTAvO7PLCEEO0RaJKVneYQ/KXhiUuuwWfQ1E vt/A==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnK5ms+8qEtvhiwNiFO4SGvfN9PjjUU7vA9diCJ1AzMD2VBt+IkSGgEhHJym7sCWJ/uwd1O
X-Received: by 10.55.54.73 with SMTP id d70mr36343694qka.22.1427923246362; Wed, 01 Apr 2015 14:20:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from panoramix.jmvalin.ca (modemcable074.170-201-24.mc.videotron.ca. [24.201.170.74]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id i13sm2110774qgi.33.2015.04.01.14.20.44 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 01 Apr 2015 14:20:45 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <551C612B.4030702@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 17:20:43 -0400
From: Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin@mozilla.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>
References: <sjmoaosz53h.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> <54E3A32F.2010008@jmvalin.ca> <760B7D45D1EFF74988DBF5C2122830C24D064CDE@szxpml507-mbx.exmail.huawei.com> <sjmk2zdzv6g.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> <916F29B3-E392-481B-A269-FBA58DFEF14D@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <916F29B3-E392-481B-A269-FBA58DFEF14D@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/Rz_EiL6ZMPt_1d-juARJQERIxWM>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 14:22:35 -0700
Cc: "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, "jspittka@gmail.com" <jspittka@gmail.com>, Roni Even <roni.even@mail01.huawei.com>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "payload-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <payload-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "koenvos74@gmail.com" <koenvos74@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [secdir] sec-dir review of draft-ietf-payload-rtp-opus-08
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 01 Apr 2015 21:20:51 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Based on Derek's latest suggestion, the text would become:

"Since Opus does not provide any confidentiality or integrity
protection, implementations SHOULD use one of the possible RTP
Security methods (See RFC7201, RFC7202)."

I think that should resolve the issue that was raised.

	Jean-Marc

On 01/04/15 05:11 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
> Hi Roni and Derek,
> 
> This thread sort of tailed off in February. Has the discussion been
> resolved?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Ben.
> 
> On 19 Feb 2015, at 11:07, Derek Atkins wrote:
> 
>> Roni,
>> 
>> I'm not an RTP guy.  To me "SRTP" is a general class of "Secure
>> RTP" protocols.  So let's work on that as my starting point:
>> implementations SHOULD protect their RTP stream.
>> 
>> Based on that, how about a re-wording here?  Instead of just
>> saying "MAY use SRTP", how about something like "SHOULD use one
>> of the possible RTP Security methods (See RFC7201, RFC7202)"?
>> (Obviously this can be worded better).
>> 
>> -derek
>> 
>> Roni Even <roni.even@mail01.huawei.com> writes:
>> 
>>> Hi, The reason for the may is discussed in RFC7201 and RFC
>>> 7202, it can be a SHOULD and these RFCs exaplain when it is not
>>> required to use SRTP. Maybe add a reference to these RFCs in
>>> the security section when saying talking about good reasons for
>>> not using SRTP
>>> 
>>> Roni Even
>>> 
>>> ________________________________________ From: Jean-Marc Valin
>>> [jvalin@mozilla.com] on behalf of Jean-Marc Valin
>>> [jmvalin@mozilla.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 10:23
>>> PM To: Derek Atkins; iesg@ietf.org; secdir@ietf.org Cc:
>>> payload-chairs@tools.ietf.org; koenvos74@gmail.com;
>>> jspittka@gmail.com Subject: Re: sec-dir review of
>>> draft-ietf-payload-rtp-opus-08
>>> 
>>> Hi Derek,
>>> 
>>> There was no particular reason for the MAY, the text was merely
>>> copied from other RTP payload RFC. I totally agree with making
>>> it a SHOULD.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Jean-Marc
>>> 
>>> On 17/02/15 02:54 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> 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
>>>> with the intent of improving security requirements and
>>>> considerations in IETF drafts.  Comments not addressed in
>>>> last call may be included in AD reviews during the IESG
>>>> review.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat these 
>>>> comments just like any other last call comments.
>>>> 
>>>> Summary:
>>>> 
>>>> Ready to publish with a question: I question why the use of
>>>> SRTP is a MAY and not a SHOULD (as detailed in the Security
>>>> Considerations section).  Considering PERPASS I believe this
>>>> should be a SHOULD; someone should have a very good reason
>>>> why they are NOT using SRTP.
>>>> 
>>>> Details:
>>>> 
>>>> This document defines the Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP)
>>>> payload format for packetization of Opus encoded speech and
>>>> audio data necessary to integrate the codec in the most
>>>> compatible way. Further, it describes media type
>>>> registrations for the RTP payload format.
>>>> 
>>>> I have no other comments on this document.
>>>> 
>>>> -derek
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________ secdir mailing
>>> list secdir@ietf.org 
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir wiki:
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/area/sec/trac/wiki/SecDirReview
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> -- Derek Atkins                 617-623-3745 derek@ihtfp.com
>> www.ihtfp.com Computer and Internet Security Consultant
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVHGEoAAoJEJ6/8sItn9q9powH/A2SNnh6bfcVBXImXZQl4Orc
Y9yt5YbF6nWZAbJsp47T5BdtrWm3sXO6I5Uibh9uVrd45G58H39PLQfiR0YxUVif
QbdusWArFTbTWSJcFJFFIWZd8PwiugkNrKk+oLlz3KyQAHXYGU85CTk+OuxSk3Hm
UWRFYBk66ae/h/VWDEF/XVZrzi2N0mSUCZzAfdgIrqQUcE7QuXz9jdgJf9xmNFEh
CmYYHRA4hCjdXtauLHwizIr77WGWEwBUtt0axmynp8w+qPj5OlTdOyIdRR6yjEhq
tifVbMOsLJvdm3a/I/6XAQOd9LEGwjfjxhIyPdJerer4msJlK2VlOZMG3cEeEmA=
=mvYf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----