IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lamps] OID für KEM?

"Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL" <uri@ll.mit.edu> Fri, 08 October 2021 17:09 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=691527a907=uri@ll.mit.edu>
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 819C03A0970 for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Oct 2021 10:09:44 -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 mrNIFwfYgOsS for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Oct 2021 10:09:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MX2.LL.MIT.EDU (mx2.ll.mit.edu [129.55.12.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96A213A0966 for <spasm@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Oct 2021 10:09:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from LLEX2019-1.mitll.ad.local (llex2019-1.llan.ll.mit.edu [172.25.4.123]) by MX2.LL.MIT.EDU (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with ESMTPS id 198H9ZJl410668 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 8 Oct 2021 13:09:35 -0400
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector5401; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=K7hqOnBa76hCgM8z649LRfPJz2zLcshBkbTIyXFmFerUcrtgWzNdqP/w7/dZktBDwLfuDEooDd40SiYMfkJWTIBMbvHn3XAoCeSolF9TmNUyNEPFZN0qExk+jALGry75AoVJLoPbLMljJ+x0Gkm0T1/D6jvQNPAx/2kkeQdiVu4Tvs4KQEEjFvwqNBMDtlqYvyGBvdoHC/h3e8lFcGZkGjQs4qY1mN2avQOdX1yvfVUNLJOnCQRpuSfb6ln0DXu50Oo65HB476619pUfaZbQ/W8uCoBgefg6FddcMVxKrbxj+wlY/jWiOTTwHOO61MqnFCTCGLReGtKMakVftf8w4Q==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector5401; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=GS2pED6VEYfdqqdyQlqs/xpHiOKJMSo6ZE+2QjEwhKU=; b=mTWhxdgPENxyz3JM74/o94MwE24D/8bt5h3nApHcP3WDRTd9rNbVL1pNBKhwMJgBNVeyFzz6uDd1ZzeZnaaKoolU9g26ROEVmMVSevopCLx+iwdwXK5S3F6rKX4QB9nY07q+4+ovmoj/59eUj0MNi1e/LH0f75dSaA+nCgmfCbniykvVAWJGysMnNelx4sLBla6iKtw+IQCuDFbKbzcq0KLsGQbdKmPt2JptOUvcipmyUdGdhIwTOM0/bJc/bGnxeMfxTk+1hfUvpIl86BZUVBpNaUz0xZnJLS1YWs6HOOVdUI15UrrBlNpFKI9jOU0Akzs19+kEXxWrWwRwcPOY/w==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ll.mit.edu; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ll.mit.edu; dkim=pass header.d=ll.mit.edu; arc=none
From: "Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL" <uri@ll.mit.edu>
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
CC: LAMPS WG <spasm@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [lamps] OID für KEM?
Thread-Index: AQHXvGRWhcj346/cM0CZhvsQ6ENjEavJUY4A///BIAA=
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2021 17:09:33 +0000
Message-ID: <FBE3CC86-6DEE-4955-9BA8-3FE2DDF35F4E@ll.mit.edu>
References: <5BA17D7A-F19D-474B-8DD8-8EB36A363818@ll.mit.edu> <C7F5365D-3B42-49CF-AA4F-E6974F071422@vigilsec.com>
In-Reply-To: <C7F5365D-3B42-49CF-AA4F-E6974F071422@vigilsec.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.52.21080801
authentication-results: vigilsec.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;vigilsec.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ll.mit.edu;
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 82609e6e-9033-4bc4-45ad-08d98a7e664f
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BN1P110MB0596:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BN1P110MB059632643B242F238DF987CD90B29@BN1P110MB0596.NAMP110.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BN1P110MB0706.NAMP110.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(366004)(6512007)(498600001)(99936003)(4326008)(38100700002)(122000001)(5660300002)(6506007)(86362001)(83380400001)(53546011)(6916009)(75432002)(224303003)(64756008)(66446008)(66556008)(38070700005)(66476007)(2906002)(26005)(66946007)(186003)(76116006)(6486002)(8936002)(2616005)(33656002)(71200400001)(45980500001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-chunkcount: 1
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-0: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha256"; boundary="B_3716543373_2178873754"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BN1P110MB0706.NAMP110.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 82609e6e-9033-4bc4-45ad-08d98a7e664f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 08 Oct 2021 17:09:33.4350 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 83d1efe3-698e-4819-911b-0a8fbe79d01c
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN1P110MB0596
X-Proofpoint-GUID: ejmhAGndeCnjAIBDTqWX4EvzCKi8fplY
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: ejmhAGndeCnjAIBDTqWX4EvzCKi8fplY
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-10-08_05:2021-10-07, 2021-10-08 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 phishscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2109230001 definitions=main-2110080095
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/jxV1iHjP8JYP7CA0KAy0U2B7gEc>
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 17:09:45 -0000

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?

>    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?

TNX


    > On Oct 8, 2021, at 12:48 PM, Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL <uri@ll.mit.edu> wrote:
    > 
    > There was a discussion here some time ago regarding NIST PQC KEM candidates, and assigning them OIDs for use in various protocols.
    > The conclusion at  that time was that an OID should identify not just the bare-bones algorithm, but the suite the KEM in question is made a part of.
    > 
    > I now need to define a certificate that would authenticate PQ public key for use in a variety of non-public (yet) protocols that utilize KEM. That means - I need to identify the algorithm this public key is for, and not bother with differentiating between different protocols that may use this KEM and therefore this public key.
    > I understand that I can create an Algo Identifier myself, but my preference is something with broader acceptability and interoperability.
    > 
    > What does the WG think? Any recommendations?
    > 
    > Regards,
    > Uri

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email