IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lamps] RSA Key Length in draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-updates

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Fri, 30 July 2021 16:15 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 91A3D3A3039 for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 09:15:27 -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 9AIck_GcnZXv for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 09:15:23 -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 018A33A3036 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 09:15:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4C093004A7 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 12:15:22 -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 IKY0RAC0y4DF for <spasm@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 12:15:21 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from a860b60074bd.fios-router.home (pool-141-156-161-153.washdc.fios.verizon.net [141.156.161.153]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 753D2300C64; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 12:15:21 -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: <AM0PR10MB2418F44F397E83838DFB447FFEEC9@AM0PR10MB2418.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 12:15:20 -0400
Cc: LAMPS WG <spasm@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2FCFBEED-E195-4EC8-9158-84CE4559C5F8@vigilsec.com>
References: <jlgeebfzxe5.fsf@redhat.com> <28004F91-3DF3-402E-865C-D9F223483F93@vigilsec.com> <99B3720E-69C2-40D2-BE94-A8A8D9E4207A@akamai.com> <AM0PR10MB2418F44F397E83838DFB447FFEEC9@AM0PR10MB2418.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
To: "Brockhaus, Hendrik" <hendrik.brockhaus@siemens.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.21)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/7SO_DGOqjRySvBrZy9THa52qvb0>
Subject: Re: [lamps] RSA Key Length in draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-updates
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, 30 Jul 2021 16:15:28 -0000

Hendrik:

This is all positive integers:

   RsaKeyLenCtrl ::= INTEGER(1..MAX)

Of course, a one bit RSA key is silly.

Russ

> On Jul 30, 2021, at 12:09 PM, Brockhaus, Hendrik <hendrik.brockhaus@siemens.com> wrote:
> 
> Russ, Rich
> 
>> Von: Spasm <spasm-bounces@ietf.org> Im Auftrag von Salz, Rich
>> 
>>>  draft-ietf-lamps-cmp-updates defines id-regCtrl-rsaKeyLen as:
>> 
>>          RsaKeyLenCtrl ::= INTEGER
>> 
>>    At a minimum, I think we need to make this a positive integer.
>> 
>> Agreed.  And speaking of minimums:
> 
> Agreed. I do only know the type INTEGER, for example in PollRepContent where the checkAfter time (a time in seconds) also needs to be positive.
> Should we use a different type here, or only express it in the comment?
> 
>> 
>>>   I see that other groups are pushing for bigger minimum key sizes for RSA
>> and D-H.
>> 
>> If we can avoid saying anything about this, that would probably be easiest.
> 
> In CMP Updates we could leave it open and in the Lightweight CMP Profile, we could specify it more concretely.
> 
> Hendrik

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email