Re: [SECMECH] Summary of IETF63 secmech BOF

> Next Steps / Action Items
> --------------------------
> 1. Collect the requirements we have for EAP methods and select a (1 - 3) 
> types of mechanisms to support.

I'd suggest the so-called "Housley Criteria", as documented by section 6.2 
of draft-ietf-eap-keying, and expanded on in section 4 of 
draft-housley-aaa-key-mgmt as a good set of technical requirements. 
These are a superset of the WLAN EAP requirements (RFC 4017).  These 
include:

* Extensible ciphersuite
* Establish strong, fresh session keys
* Maintain algorithm independence
* Include replay detection mechanism
* Authenticate all parties
* Maintain confidentiality of authenticator
* No plaintext passwords
* Perform client and NAS authorization
* Maintain confidentiality of session keys
* Confirm selection of "best" ciphersuite
* Uniquely name session keys
* Compromise of a single NAS cannot compromise any other part of the
   system, including session keys and long-term keys
* Bind key to appropriate context

As for methods to select, I proposed EAP-PAX (draft-clancy-eap-pax) and 
EAP-TLS (RFC 2716).  EAP-PAX is a non-tunneled, shared-key method 
supporting key management, provisioning, and identity protection.  It 
satisfies all the aforementioned requirements.  EAP-TLS would require some 
minor updates to meet the requirements, but would make a solid public-key 
standards-track method.

[ t. charles clancy ]--[ tcc@umd.edu ]--[ www.cs.umd.edu/~clancy ]
[ computer science ]-----[ university of maryland | college park ]

_______________________________________________
SECMECH mailing list
SECMECH@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secmech