Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-ecrit-additional-data

Randall Gellens <randy@qti.qualcomm.com> Wed, 16 September 2015 16:14 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@qti.qualcomm.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 6E70E1A0275 for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 09:14:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.011
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 o5iegzKJqp0N for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 09:14:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sabertooth02.qualcomm.com (sabertooth02.qualcomm.com [65.197.215.38]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93F101A026E for <secdir@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 09:14:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qti.qualcomm.com; i=@qti.qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1442420069; x=1473956069; h=message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:to:from:subject: cc:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3MlQFPYuNdznl48u/LFaTcwSATG1kJjFqHkJaYaNDhY=; b=O1KJwpFLcMq3zxNHrSUCRJ1qg8xgqYksJnrfUJmDzxMvKdIaXqSmZJgJ 2Lr+mxVhzPey2OEaStux8/dEDR44rQZvFUaFSNu9lzdjy0x9Esn+QBG/L oAIk7vfdYnauOJQIhs8NkOcXx4PrKTk0uAoai7trOAdNX+5pAC+SqoKUA s=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5700,7163,7925"; a="97973667"
Received: from ironmsg04-r.qualcomm.com ([172.30.46.18]) by sabertooth02.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 16 Sep 2015 09:14:09 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,540,1437462000"; d="scan'208";a="1055867249"
Received: from nasanexm02f.na.qualcomm.com ([10.85.0.87]) by Ironmsg04-R.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 16 Sep 2015 09:14:08 -0700
Received: from [99.111.97.136] (10.80.80.8) by nasanexm02f.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.87) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1076.9; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 09:14:07 -0700
Message-ID: <p06240616d21f443ed6d5@[99.111.97.136]>
In-Reply-To: <2do7j0.nurejh.2vaeqo-qmf@mercury.scss.tcd.ie>
References: <CADajj4bzDNqCzaJSjviVZm1nk8CrbUopzj0PrNNOUcK9SNG1ZA@mail.gmail.com> <p06240610d21e68de6c17@99.111.97.136> <CADajj4a+uJi3h1qjQ9xgGup_2teQc9hgfRyWDwwKvQS5aUJDOg@mail.gmail.com> <p06240612d21e7dc050f6@99.111.97.136> <CADajj4ZGx-8vFrZXd_CQcuG3GJWYDJoFTBQ+do-duicgadkEYw@mail.gmail.com> <2do7j0.nurejh.2vaeqo-qmf@mercury.scss.tcd.ie>
X-Mailer: Eudora for Mac OS X
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 09:14:05 -0700
To: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, <magnusn@gmail.com>, <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
From: Randall Gellens <randy@qti.qualcomm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Random-Sig-Tag: 1.0b28
X-Random-Sig-Tag: 1.0b28
X-Originating-IP: [10.80.80.8]
X-ClientProxiedBy: NASANEXM01G.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.33) To nasanexm02f.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.87)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/SJ92w8NjGnKpBVXuJ98oKju8zfA>
Cc: draft-ietf-ecrit-additional-data@tools.ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-ecrit-additional-data
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 16 Sep 2015 16:14:29 -0000

At 7:38 AM +0000 9/16/15, stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie wrote:

>  On Wed Sep 16 04:09:03 2015 GMT+0100, Magnus Nyström wrote:
>>  Yes, at least mandating TLS 1.2 or higher and recommending as per above
>>  seems reasonable.
>>  The references for the GCM suites would be RFC 5288 and RFC 5289.
>
>  BCP195 has recent recommendations for most TLS 
> options. I'd say it'd be best to use those or 
> if not figure out why they're not correct for 
> this context.

Just to be clear: are you suggesting that we replace text suggested by Magnus:

    TLS MUST be version 1.2 or later.  It is RECOMMENDED to use only
    cypher suites that offer Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS) and avoid
    Cipher Block Chaining (CBC), for example,
    TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384,
    TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256,
    TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384,
    TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256,
    TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384,
    TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 [RFC5288] [RFC5289].

With this:

    TLS MUST be version 1.2 or later.  It is RECOMMENDED follow
    [BCP195].


Note that BCP 195 does not address CBC (but does 
discuss PFS).  I just want to be clear before 
making the change, so please confirm that this 
works.

-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly selected tag: ---------------
If the odds are a million to one against something occurring, chances
are 50-50 it will.