Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-yang-07

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Thu, 28 November 2019 07:13 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
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 EE531120C63; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 23:13:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 y4bFSDeifXX8; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 23:13:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (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 9D56D120C61; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 23:12:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mit.edu ([24.16.140.251]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id xAS7CbaF028522 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 28 Nov 2019 02:12:40 -0500
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 23:12:37 -0800
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: "Shawn M. Emery" <semery@uccs.edu>
Cc: secdir <secdir@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-yang.all@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20191128071237.GR32847@mit.edu>
References: <CAChzXmaHQa8QgyzVHrV09Gj9UHSm7tEiEsG60EJmw-hQenUXEg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAChzXmaHQa8QgyzVHrV09Gj9UHSm7tEiEsG60EJmw-hQenUXEg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/mW5qc3yAeKO1MFWRApHfRwPeoEg>
Subject: Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-yang-07
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: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 07:13:10 -0000

Hi Shawn,

Thanks for the review!
I think the latest version of the template for YANG model security
considerations is at
https://trac.ietf.org/trac/ops/wiki/yang-security-guidelines (which does
want a list of the subtrees and nodes are sensitive, so you are wise to
call it out).

-Ben

On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 03:30:31PM -0700, Shawn M. Emery wrote:
> Reviewer: Shawn M. Emery
> Review result: Ready with nits
> 
> 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 specifies a YANG model for the Multi-Protocol Label
> Switching (MPLS) Label Distribution Protocol (LDP).  Network
> Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) and RESTCONF is used
> to mange network devices based on this model.
> 
> The security considerations section does exist and for security
> and privacy concerns, discusses that the MTI for NETCONF is
> SSH and TLS for RESTCONF.  For authorization, NETCONF
> and RESTCONF uses the Network Configuration Access Control
> Model (NACM).
> 
> The section goes on to state that some data nodes
> and RPC operations in the YANG module are considered sensitive
> to various operations, but does not give guidance on which nodes
> or subtrees that would be affected.  In the past, module specifications
> that I've reviewed have outlined each of these relevant items.
> 
> The section finishes with the statement that the security
> properties of the base specifications, LDP, LDP IPv6, etc., also applies
> to this draft.  I agree with the above assertions.
> 
> General comments:
> 
> None.
> 
> Editorial comments:
> 
> s/into following/into the following/
> s/means and be read/should be read/
> s/family"/family"./
> s/VPN Forwarding and Routing/VPN Routing and Forwarding/
> s/provides a mean/provides a means/
> s/Neibgbor/Neighbor/
> s/pereference/preference/
> s/creatable\/ deletable/creatable\/deletable/
> 
> RESTCONF should be expanded on first ocurence.
> 
> Shawn.
> --

> _______________________________________________
> secdir mailing list
> secdir@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir
> wiki: http://tools.ietf.org/area/sec/trac/wiki/SecDirReview