[secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-payload-rfc-4695-bis-01

"Dan Harkins" <dharkins@lounge.org> Mon, 21 February 2011 20:47 UTC

Return-Path: <dharkins@lounge.org>
X-Original-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 313033A6F5C; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:47:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.265
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.265 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vXhQmcsCDWSX; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:47:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from colo.trepanning.net (colo.trepanning.net [69.55.226.174]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77A603A6F53; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:47:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from www.trepanning.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by colo.trepanning.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2021F1022400A; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:47:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 69.12.173.8 (SquirrelMail authenticated user dharkins@lounge.org) by www.trepanning.net with HTTP; Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:47:43 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <921c32f070a0520ac880b4bf4b4d8404.squirrel@www.trepanning.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:47:43 -0800 (PST)
From: "Dan Harkins" <dharkins@lounge.org>
To: iesg@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-payload-rfc4695-bis-01.all@tools.ietf.org
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.14 [SVN]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
Subject: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-payload-rfc-4695-bis-01
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 20:47:01 -0000

  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.

  This draft fixes several errors that were found in RFC 4695. I reviewed
the changes between RFC 4695 and this draft and found no issues that the
Security ADs should be made aware of. The Security Considerations do not
seem to have changed.

  The Security Considerations mention an issue in this draft (and RFC
4695) that can lessen RTP security. I am not suggesting a change to this
draft but if the RTP community is interested in addressing this issue I
believe it could be fixed by using AES-SIV (RFC 5297) instead of AES-CM
(the XOR'd components of the IV used by AES-CM should become distinct,
and unpadded, vector inputs to AES-SIV).

  regards,

  Dan.