Re: [lamps] On the need for standardization of software-based interoperable private keys [was: Re: draft-ietf-lamps-samples: PKCS12 expertise needed (including objects for comparison)]

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Sat, 07 August 2021 15:52 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 A90AB3A3E93 for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Aug 2021 08:52:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 2Ruk2x4zOHSR for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Aug 2021 08:52:11 -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 20EC83A3E92 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Sat, 7 Aug 2021 08:52:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D357300C3A for <spasm@ietf.org>; Sat, 7 Aug 2021 11:52:10 -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 lBGuAgYKGpY0 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Sat, 7 Aug 2021 11:52:09 -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 15B1C3002A6; Sat, 7 Aug 2021 11:52:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Message-Id: <115D31F8-A088-413B-A526-9C48D579C122@vigilsec.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_422B778E-100F-43F3-AC2F-E9A9A43D2493"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.21\))
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2021 11:52:07 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87zgtv3jf9.fsf@fifthhorseman.net>
Cc: LAMPS WG <spasm@ietf.org>
To: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
References: <87czr0ww0d.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <FF939B28-528B-47F9-9C0C-6585D1B02FBE@vigilsec.com> <87mtq3ukk0.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <CAErg=HHQMZ1jk+bVxA=MzVvW+9ucie7bu-N6O8Asnp0V8Rf9Bg@mail.gmail.com> <30546.1627850836@localhost> <CAErg=HHKL-E5yT0UnPKcLfMQU41iDg7GGgjsSXs3eRg8daJRkg@mail.gmail.com> <87wnp347iu.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <1388.1627996026@localhost> <87pmuu42hf.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <20862.1628113377@localhost> <656985A5-BED4-4BA8-9233-B3C93966016C@ll.mit.edu> <877dh03x35.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <722a1f15-8ac8-54f2-3c7a-14c7ed92c6ef@cs.tcd.ie> <87zgtv3jf9.fsf@fifthhorseman.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.21)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/gJG4q9VzBmyyG26DEtDy1ecmJik>
Subject: Re: [lamps] On the need for standardization of software-based interoperable private keys [was: Re: draft-ietf-lamps-samples: PKCS12 expertise needed (including objects for comparison)]
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: Sat, 07 Aug 2021 15:52:15 -0000

> On Aug 5, 2021, at 1:12 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> wrote:
> 
> - formally deprecate PKCS#12 (e.g. move 7292 from informational to
>   historical) and encourage some other standard (a PKZIP file full of
>   independent PKCS#8 objects and certificate objects?  that seems
>   morally equivalent to PKCS#12 to me, but a much longer lead time to
>   get any sort of adoption)

RFC 5208 is the PKCS#8 v1.2 specification.

RFC 5985 is an enhancement to PKCS#8 that allows the certificate to be carried along with the private key.  In addition, RFC 5985 provides a content type for PKCS#8.

RFC 4073 defines a way to carry a collection of contents, each with their own type:

      ContentCollection ::= SEQUENCE SIZE (1..MAX) OF ContentInfo

These seem to be the building blocks that are needed to carrya a collection of PKCS#8-protected private keys along with the associated certificate.

Russ