Re: [secdir] [rmcat] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-test-09

Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> Tue, 12 February 2019 18:06 UTC

Return-Path: <csp@csperkins.org>
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 1156E130DBE; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:06:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 CJeZRkdPAjNR; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:06:03 -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 E761812F1A5; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:06:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [130.209.157.52] (port=42229 helo=glaroam2-159-244.wireless.gla.ac.uk) by balrog.mythic-beasts.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <csp@csperkins.org>) id 1gtcRR-0006uK-3g; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 18:06:01 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
From: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
In-Reply-To: <154983471836.14687.15606048759231374187@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 18:05:50 +0000
Cc: secdir@ietf.org, "rmcat@ietf.org WG" <rmcat@ietf.org>, iesg@ietf.org, draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-test.all@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <AB0DB57E-5087-4FAD-A248-2AC500F49DDA@csperkins.org>
References: <154983471836.14687.15606048759231374187@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Joseph Salowey <joe@salowey.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: 4
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/g_1T75duOX6DY9n90COXEsmGi6c>
Subject: Re: [secdir] [rmcat] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-test-09
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: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 18:06:05 -0000

> On 10 Feb 2019, at 21:38, Joseph Salowey <joe@salowey.net> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Joseph Salowey
> Review result: Has Issues
> 
> 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.
> 
> The summary of the review is Document has issues.   I would like to see Stewart
> Bryant’s Genart comments about emphasizing that tests should be conducted in a controlled environment and not the open Internet.

This text was strengthened somewhat in -09, in response to the GenART review of -08. Is this enough, or are further changes needed?

-- 
Colin Perkins
https://csperkins.org/