Re: [lamps] draft-ietf-lamps-cms-shakes

Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> Thu, 12 September 2019 04:54 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@augustcellars.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 C32C012081F for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 21:54:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 xiYl3ChIfzSh for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 21:54:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.augustcellars.com (augustcellars.com [50.45.239.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4857E12080E for <spasm@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 21:54:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Jude (73.180.8.170) by mail2.augustcellars.com (192.168.0.56) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 21:54:29 -0700
From: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
To: "'Panos Kampanakis (pkampana)'" <pkampana@cisco.com>, 'Russ Housley' <housley@vigilsec.com>, 'LAMPS WG' <spasm@ietf.org>
References: <6FA94952-63C4-42A3-A85F-AAB0A8145F68@vigilsec.com> <BN7PR11MB2547BEF4B27B52ECBF64525EC9B00@BN7PR11MB2547.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <BN7PR11MB2547BEF4B27B52ECBF64525EC9B00@BN7PR11MB2547.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 21:54:27 -0700
Message-ID: <00bb01d56926$296d4b80$7c47e280$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Content-Language: en-us
Thread-Index: AQJ9oOfTTjAaQCybpEakgIm7VCChzwKGFaBNpcLZPCA=
X-Originating-IP: [73.180.8.170]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/iTEq7gJdGCKNFoKEcmc8hd4rLqg>
Subject: Re: [lamps] draft-ietf-lamps-cms-shakes
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: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 04:54:38 -0000

Redefining is something that is not good.  You only want to have a single
definition if at all possible.

Importing something that is not referenced is a bit odd, but does not hurt
anything.  Pointing to where something is defined would be sufficient as far
as I am concerned

-- sa-rsassapssWithSHAKE  - this is defined in RFCXXXX

Jim


-----Original Message-----
From: Spasm <spasm-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Panos Kampanakis
(pkampana)
Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2019 9:22 PM
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>; LAMPS WG <spasm@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [lamps] draft-ietf-lamps-cms-shakes

Hi Russ, 

Hmm, do we need it? 

CMS imports AlgorithmIdentifier from PKIX which we updated in the PKIX
SHAKEs draft. And then CMS uses these algorithm identifiers in the
SignedData SignerInfo signatureAlgorithm field. 

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5753#appendix-A.2 does import sa-ecdsawithXXX
as you are suggesting, but I am not sure it needed to. I mean we could
import the new sa-ecdsawithshake and sa-rsassapssWithSHAKE and put them
SignatureAlgs to make it easier, but it would be commented out like
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5753#appendix-A.2 does because it already
exists in the PKIX SHAKEs ASN.1

Rgs,
Panos


-----Original Message-----
From: Spasm <spasm-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Russ Housley
Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2019 3:06 PM
To: LAMPS WG <spasm@ietf.org>
Subject: [lamps] draft-ietf-lamps-cms-shakes

I was just working on an implementation, and I discovered an omission in the
ASN.1 for draft-ietf-lamps-cms-shakes.

The ASN.1 module for draft-ietf-lamps-pkix-shake includes:

    -- RSASSA-PSS with SHAKE128
    sa-rsassapssWithSHAKE128 SIGNATURE-ALGORITHM ::= {
      IDENTIFIER id-RSASSA-PSS-SHAKE128
      PARAMS ARE absent
          -- The hashAlgorithm is mda-shake128
          -- The maskGenAlgorithm is id-shake128
          -- Mask Gen Algorithm is SHAKE128 with output length
          -- (8*ceil((n-1)/8) - 264) bits, where n is the RSA
          -- modulus in bits.
          -- The saltLength is 32. The trailerField is 1
      HASHES { mda-shake128 }
      PUBLIC-KEYS { pk-rsa | pk-rsaSSA-PSS-SHAKE128 }
      SMIME-CAPS { IDENTIFIED BY id-RSASSA-PSS-SHAKE128 }
    }
    id-RSASSA-PSS-SHAKE128  OBJECT IDENTIFIER  ::=  { iso(1)
            identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1)
            security(5) mechanisms(5) pkix(7) algorithms(6)
            TBD1 }

    -- RSASSA-PSS with SHAKE256
    sa-rsassapssWithSHAKE256 SIGNATURE-ALGORITHM ::= {
      IDENTIFIER id-RSASSA-PSS-SHAKE256
      PARAMS ARE absent
          -- The hashAlgorithm is mda-shake256
          -- The maskGenAlgorithm is id-shake256
          -- Mask Gen Algorithm is SHAKE256 with output length
          -- (8*ceil((n-1)/8) - 520)-bits, where n is the
          -- RSA modulus in bits.
          -- The saltLength is 64. The trailerField is 1.
     HASHES { mda-shake256 }
     PUBLIC-KEYS { pk-rsa | pk-rsaSSA-PSS-SHAKE256 }
     SMIME-CAPS { IDENTIFIED BY id-RSASSA-PSS-SHAKE256 }
    }
    id-RSASSA-PSS-SHAKE256  OBJECT IDENTIFIER  ::=  { iso(1)
            identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1)
            security(5) mechanisms(5) pkix(7) algorithms(6)
            TBD2 }

    -- ECDSA with SHAKE128
    sa-ecdsaWithSHAKE128 SIGNATURE-ALGORITHM ::= {
      IDENTIFIER id-ecdsa-with-shake128
      VALUE ECDSA-Sig-Value
      PARAMS ARE absent
      HASHES { mda-shake128 }
      PUBLIC-KEYS { pk-ec }
      SMIME-CAPS { IDENTIFIED BY id-ecdsa-with-shake128 }
    }
    id-ecdsa-with-shake128 OBJECT IDENTIFIER  ::=  { iso(1)
            identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1)
            security(5) mechanisms(5) pkix(7) algorithms(6)
            TBD3 }

    -- ECDSA with SHAKE256
    sa-ecdsaWithSHAKE256 SIGNATURE-ALGORITHM ::= {
      IDENTIFIER id-ecdsa-with-shake256
      VALUE ECDSA-Sig-Value
      PARAMS ARE absent
      HASHES { mda-shake256 }
      PUBLIC-KEYS { pk-ec }
      SMIME-CAPS { IDENTIFIED BY id-ecdsa-with-shake256 }
    }
    id-ecdsa-with-shake256 OBJECT IDENTIFIER  ::=  { iso(1)
            identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1)
            security(5) mechanisms(5) pkix(7) algorithms(6)
            TBD4 }

I think that the draft-ietf-lamps-cms-shakes ASN.1 module should repeat this
information in exactly the same format or it should IMPORT these
definitions.

Russ
_______________________________________________
Spasm mailing list
Spasm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm

_______________________________________________
Spasm mailing list
Spasm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm