IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lamps] S/MIME fix

Ryan Sleevi <ryan-ietf@sleevi.com> Thu, 17 May 2018 19:36 UTC

Return-Path: <ryan-ietf@sleevi.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 083FE126D85 for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 May 2018 12:36:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=sleevi.com
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 KsipHpQtNeMO for <spasm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 May 2018 12:36:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a112.g.dreamhost.com (homie-sub4.mail.dreamhost.com [69.163.253.135]) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FFCC12D942 for <SPASM@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 May 2018 12:36:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a112.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a112.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8E0830002835 for <SPASM@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 May 2018 12:36:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sleevi.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc :content-type; s=sleevi.com; bh=8+WYd8E/jpqzRFCwMpNPU/5Kk94=; b= pk1oz9cVPLvrpiKloZLpiAt4D3jguE6YlrAAy9QhGGUCGiRfapvmntgdfxIfj6oL KXsi+hLU19SKiRlIepFTMjp9DexwYbIDPdIbGO3P5yY3yoQ9HCtCF/Rk16uW6Huk aOiNXWRsg4/Mo29BvoV/xiOkc61GwP1kTxG4EPzZ9WY=
Received: from mail-it0-f42.google.com (mail-it0-f42.google.com [209.85.214.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ryan@sleevi.com) by homiemail-a112.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AB1723000282C for <SPASM@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 May 2018 12:36:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-f42.google.com with SMTP id q4-v6so10326614ite.3 for <SPASM@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 May 2018 12:36:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwfrQdvtVSFnx/ewDXGlEH9b5bTOgIaxuJKXK3mkIcj6F9qWsclJ 3DieCFTff42gPs8xNSC4ra5MHADfwWcjmH6HPec=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZq0PtMTmM/p0pZ/LJ3hFtEYkitbyXLSNeju0I7qpuzNpkjVktk17vVzxChQQsYPzah+oNJUpR+tf35Xh/ZirtI=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:5e4d:: with SMTP id h74-v6mr3883936itb.91.1526585765706; Thu, 17 May 2018 12:36:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a02:985a:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 17 May 2018 12:36:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <858D7264-5B1D-4834-B122-CE49C1B89A32@vigilsec.com>
References: <CAMm+Lwj=VTBHYxH-iOaqEUHxALpBfSXWG3p0+xxUnY+o4CmGvA@mail.gmail.com> <BN6PR14MB1106A2890EE8B9243B4EA08C83920@BN6PR14MB1106.namprd14.prod.outlook.com> <CAMm+LwhuBoQ1VHQy-=E2FODYq4Fnzs8e24Yqyfg4akwQTsqc=w@mail.gmail.com> <1e8468d7-da6c-62f1-e24b-1ee03df22606@cs.tcd.ie> <e678276f-79c2-ec3c-7df5-f70794740f77@nostrum.com> <AB332E06-E1F5-4E82-9EF8-B49846865DAC@vigilsec.com> <f623981f-a379-4a94-0fda-a765a8318841@nostrum.com> <CAMm+LwjFqv4JiRLTBAcZB+EvBC0nH53jgBaCfFfaGTa5QSbrZw@mail.gmail.com> <c6424d23-493c-8831-41c1-2ebcc808b7c9@nostrum.com> <CAErg=HF9hMZwPsZUAK81WigdmGLTGaRK7bJ=BrjnHhjBWvYNLg@mail.gmail.com> <858D7264-5B1D-4834-B122-CE49C1B89A32@vigilsec.com>
From: Ryan Sleevi <ryan-ietf@sleevi.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 15:36:05 -0400
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAErg=HG+JR+OF_L=iawoWWA0XMZaD5W3gXMOey-7iJS2WKbcyg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAErg=HG+JR+OF_L=iawoWWA0XMZaD5W3gXMOey-7iJS2WKbcyg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Cc: Ryan Sleevi <ryan-ietf@sleevi.com>, SPASM <SPASM@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000048e59c056c6bf284"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/kZVOufit7ISm-xHHeH0eBqVrNfA>
Subject: Re: [lamps] S/MIME fix
X-BeenThere: spasm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 17 May 2018 19:36:09 -0000

Sure, that part sounded uncontroversial. I was simply having a hard time
about the WebCrypto API or the philosophical differences of CERN and
Netscape's design philosophies was helping us move towards that. The
conversation from Jim and Alexey seemed a great path forward to exploring
that.

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 2:58 PM, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:

> Ryan:
>
> It seems to me that the LAMPS WG should say something about how to avoid
> the eFail attack in the Security Considerations of draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5751.
>
> Russ
>
>
> On May 17, 2018, at 2:53 PM, Ryan Sleevi <ryan-ietf@sleevi.com> wrote:
>
> I'm having trouble understanding how the current discussion relates to the
> LAMPS work. It sounds from Phil's initial message, is that this isn't
> related to LAMPS. There's been suggestions that this might be the
> CA/Browser Forum (despite the CA/Browser Forum not even having a proposed
> charter to clean this up), that this might be a W3C/WHATWG issue (despite
> the browsers explicitly rejecting some of these proposals), or perhaps
> somewhere else.
>
> For my own understanding, is there a concrete proposal for either a
> document or work LAMPS should take on? Otherwise, would it be better to
> have this discussion elsewhere?
>
> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/17/18 10:46 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>>
>> I am composing this in Gmail right now. And there is my outlook client in
>> the window underneath. ​The Web browser is not just a full fledged email
>> client, it is the client of choice.
>>
>>
>> I don't want to get too far down the rabbit hole of semantics here, but
>> claiming that a browser is an email client because it can run Gmail is
>> fully congruent with claiming your operating system is an email client
>> because it can run Outlook.
>>
>> More to the point: you know what I meant.
>>
>> /a
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Spasm mailing list
>> Spasm@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm
>>
>>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email