IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lamps] OID für KEM?

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Fri, 08 October 2021 17:13 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B2DF3A0529 for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Oct 2021 10:13:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 mkM00kd_Kr-n for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Oct 2021 10:13:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net [209.135.209.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEDF13A097A for <spasm@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Oct 2021 10:13:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04E50300C50 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Oct 2021 13:13:06 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net
Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id FPxqkRnNXTPE for <spasm@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Oct 2021 13:13:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.161] (pool-141-156-161-153.washdc.fios.verizon.net [141.156.161.153]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B4F7A30026C; Fri, 8 Oct 2021 13:13:04 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.21\))
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
In-Reply-To: <FBE3CC86-6DEE-4955-9BA8-3FE2DDF35F4E@ll.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2021 13:13:01 -0400
Cc: LAMPS WG <spasm@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8A3163D9-EB86-487E-B0D4-75A39AB44797@vigilsec.com>
References: <5BA17D7A-F19D-474B-8DD8-8EB36A363818@ll.mit.edu> <C7F5365D-3B42-49CF-AA4F-E6974F071422@vigilsec.com> <FBE3CC86-6DEE-4955-9BA8-3FE2DDF35F4E@ll.mit.edu>
To: Uri Blumenthal <uri@ll.mit.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.21)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/5tQG0u-Nk4aC_UgFdU3YVL4DYFk>
Subject: Re: [lamps] OID für KEM?
X-BeenThere: spasm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is a venue for discussion of doing Some Pkix And SMime \(spasm\) work." <spasm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spasm/>
List-Post: <mailto:spasm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2021 17:13:11 -0000

Uri:
> 
> On 10/8/21, 12:55, "Russ Housley" <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
> 
>>   Researchers are going to assign OIDs to use in their projects.
>>   A group of researchers might collaborate to use the same OIDs.
> 
> Understood, thanks!
> 
>>   My worry is that these will not ever go away.
> 
> I don't see a problem in this. 
> 
> E.g., Blake2 is not the final choice - but some apps use it, so what's wrong with having an interoperable way of identifying it?

That is not my point at all.  My worry is with the winning algorithms.  I worry that implementations will have to support the researcher-assigned OID and the NIST-assigned OID.

> 
>>   The LAMPS WG cannot assign these OIDs.  The charter says:
>>     5.a. The US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
>>     .  .  .  .  .
>>     The LAMPS WG will specify the use of these new PQC public key
>>     algorithms with the PKIX certificates .  .  .  .  .
>>     These specifications will use object identifiers
>>     for the new algorithms that are assigned by NIST.
> 
> I see - this WG will define *how* those algorithms are used, but the OIDs themselves must come from NIST, like the selected algorithms themselves?

Yes.

Russ

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email