IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-03

Sara Dickinson <sara@sinodun.com> Wed, 18 December 2019 13:45 UTC

Return-Path: <sara@sinodun.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 A1B4E12004C; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 05:45:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 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_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sinodun.com
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 9m5bf7MOtWEu; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 05:45:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from balrog.mythic-beasts.com (balrog.mythic-beasts.com [IPv6:2a00:1098:0:82:1000:0:2:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E4A512003E; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 05:45:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sinodun.com ; s=mythic-beasts-k1; h=To:Date:From:Subject; bh=t7zDSOCjt6kFf2vidi2Wqcl8nV3C8Q2rZiWCV70y0fs=; b=ezlBokCHSbHTO+1GHNDH/xt3HM A683IH1r1fDX665tH68yf3UC0f5gDHzL+GY5D+iX5p07gEtj42P2KWxi2JfpFfNCpraIWqPFgvItU o+R9z6UXkrI17tfSDVo0/4Ch2kn4UBRDFqnOOhVALAg2g+Pa9xZF3jhGgqoUBRXvTO51/oZf0p/80 2jlMaOAGwQCEyi729jD1VeTRJDdChASdLti+4BT3Z1XoMGsm14il8cdA5lKrioCKY52GE5F4kPrNG YgplWTb2/LqtoifTvVYTAiVWk2XDsCvucVGDrpVFiw37IgRYG8mcJAbJIx1ya3RS8ZowvF5dY+ocW d8LBfjKQ==;
Received: from [2001:b98:204:102:fffa::2] (port=51553) by balrog.mythic-beasts.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from <sara@sinodun.com>) id 1ihZdq-0006DP-SS; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 13:45:34 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
From: Sara Dickinson <sara@sinodun.com>
In-Reply-To: <157504194893.4871.5551746255324168227@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 13:45:27 +0000
Cc: secdir@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, dns-privacy@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis.all@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <208AD30F-1213-4784-81FC-4AB76730CEC2@sinodun.com>
References: <157504194893.4871.5551746255324168227@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: 4
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/XfLeAaU-V5XQfGg4hYPb0BWBWiU>
Subject: Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-03
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 18 Dec 2019 13:45:38 -0000


> On 29 Nov 2019, at 15:39, Stephen Farrell via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Stephen Farrell
> Review result: Ready

Hi Stephen, 

Thanks for reviewing (again)!

> 
> I might not be the best reviewer for this one as I've read it a few times
> before. But anyway, I scanned the diff [1] with RFC7626 and figure it
> seems fine. 
> 
> The only thing that occurred to me that seemed missing was to note
> that while the new privacy analysis in 3.5.1.1 is already complex, many
> systems are mobile and hence an analysis that ignores that won't be 
> sufficient. For a mobile device one really needs to analyse all of the 
> possible setups, and hence it's even harder to get to a good answer. 
> (It could be that that's elsewhere in the document but since I only 
> read the diff, I didn't see it:-)

There was a bit of discussion about this and the following text in 3.4.1 was added:

“ It is also noted that typically a device connected _only_ to a modern
   cellular network is

   o  directly configured with only the recursive resolvers of the IAP
      and

   o  all traffic (including DNS) between the device and the cellular
      network is encrypted following an encryption profile edited by the
      Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP [2]).

   The attack surface for this specific scenario is not considered here."

Which hopefully covers this?

Sara

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email