Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-baker-ietf-core-03.txt

Steven Bellovin <smb@cs.columbia.edu> Sat, 21 November 2009 22:13 UTC

Return-Path: <smb@cs.columbia.edu>
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 6ADA93A69F7; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:13:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 XVFcSp4wGzh8; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:13:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from serrano.cc.columbia.edu (serrano.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.29.6]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4941D3A6952; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:13:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.2.182] (74-92-112-54-Philadelphia.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [74.92.112.54]) (user=smb2132 mech=PLAIN bits=0) by serrano.cc.columbia.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nALMDTV4017924 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:13:29 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Steven Bellovin <smb@cs.columbia.edu>
In-Reply-To: <a123a5d60911211242m73f8fa48xf5434919015b6bbc@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:13:28 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <E6D49AAD-3D80-4A97-8368-53F8137A7698@cs.columbia.edu>
References: <D80EDFF2AD83E648BD1164257B9B0912082E2E08@TK5EX14MBXC115.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <988E4A1D-518B-467F-97A1-3087CE6D071A@cs.columbia.edu> <a123a5d60911211242m73f8fa48xf5434919015b6bbc@mail.gmail.com>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077)
X-No-Spam-Score: Local
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.65 on 128.59.29.6
Cc: "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, "fred@cisco.com" <fred@cisco.com>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-baker-ietf-core-03.txt
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: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:13:38 -0000

On Nov 21, 2009, at 3:42 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:

> You can however do CMS without S/MIME.

Precisely my point.
> 
> I agree that we should regard S/MIME as an extension to MIME. But the
> origin was really to take the RSA developed PKCS#7 technology and
> apply it to MIME. There really isn't much of a link there to the PEM
> work. The IETF attempt to resurrect PEM in MIME was MOSS.
> 
....
> 
> The point about S/MIME being protection of data at rest is a critical
> one.

Right -- what should we recommend?

> We do in fact have a security layer for SMTP - TLS. More mail is
> secured using TLS than any other mail encryption protocol.

Yes, but not really relevant for this section.


		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb