Re: [lamps] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5751-bis-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Tue, 10 July 2018 02:49 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@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 B551B1310EA; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 19:49:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 co3si0ud0X3N; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 19:49:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-1.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-1.mit.edu [18.9.25.12]) (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 D08591310E3; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 19:49:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 1209190c-2f7ff70000002bf1-2d-5b441ea64688
Received: from mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.35]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-1.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 96.82.11249.6AE144B5; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 22:49:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH-1.MIT.EDU [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id w6A2n8ZK019829; Mon, 9 Jul 2018 22:49:09 -0400
Received: from kduck.kaduk.org (24-107-191-124.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com [24.107.191.124]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id w6A2n3Aa000817 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 9 Jul 2018 22:49:06 -0400
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2018 21:49:03 -0500
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
Cc: "'The IESG'" <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5751-bis@ietf.org, "'Russ Housley'" <housley@vigilsec.com>, lamps-chairs@ietf.org, spasm@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20180710024903.GI59001@kduck.kaduk.org>
References: <153079945499.11322.17868589339590763702.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <00a901d41484$2494b0f0$6dbe12d0$@augustcellars.com> <20180705213656.GR60996@kduck.kaduk.org> <039a01d417e4$f1228260$d3678720$@augustcellars.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <039a01d417e4$f1228260$d3678720$@augustcellars.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprAKsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixCmqrLtMziXa4M8MA4vbP3YzW7x6cZPd YsaficwWq6d/Z7O4PHctm8W8a8kObB4b50xn81iy5CeTx6o7X1gDmKO4bFJSczLLUov07RK4 Mo68msFSMEux4nfLG9YGxm6pLkZODgkBE4krN64zdzFycQgJLGaSmNx0jgnC2cAocfXsTRYI 5wqTxLG1PxhBWlgEVCTmPt3PDGKzAdkN3ZfBbBEBdYmtq2+CdTMLrGSUuL9kNhNIQlggTWL+ 2w1sIDYv0L7Gn8ehVjxllHjRd5UJIiEocXLmExYQm1lAS+LGv5dAcQ4gW1pi+T8OEJNTwEFi zxsnkApRAWWJvX2H2CcwCsxC0jwLSfMshOYFjMyrGGVTcqt0cxMzc4pTk3WLkxPz8lKLdA31 cjNL9FJTSjcxggNbkmcH45k3XocYBTgYlXh4N6Q6RwuxJpYVV+YeYpTkYFIS5Z1wCSjEl5Sf UpmRWJwRX1Sak1p8iFGCg1lJhNcgByjHm5JYWZValA+TkuZgURLnzV7EGC0kkJ5YkpqdmlqQ WgSTleHgUJLgrZF1iRYSLEpNT61Iy8wpQUgzcXCCDOcBGi4LUsNbXJCYW5yZDpE/xajL8ef9 1EnMQix5+XmpUuK8/CBFAiBFGaV5cHNACUkie3/NK0ZxoLeEeSeAVPEAkxncpFdAS5iAlmgv BPmguCQRISXVwHj0mt3TU/q+O3ckCd85sm/WgbVP3Rbx6Ol9uq61Y7PrzXN7V3SsvlByfa1A Yjj/fq+P+sw3qto+yjcHBk6VuOS/5YSZ9puml+/dgv/NqklOXy3580HMDtPJ+5isRWyncOWE B/f9Nr7q3RZ7y3tl6Gy9CT6TQ/pCXEXOe1mXP6jbeUetTSBcPkSJpTgj0VCLuag4EQDkxWwe IwMAAA==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/liVsbm5lNkiLMIINFAgX6RqwBmY>
Subject: Re: [lamps] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5751-bis-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: spasm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 02:49:16 -0000

On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 05:28:33PM -0700, Jim Schaad wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
> > Sent: Thursday, July 5, 2018 2:37 PM
> > To: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
> > Cc: 'The IESG' <iesg@ietf.org>rg>; draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5751-bis@ietf.org;
> 'Russ
> > Housley' <housley@vigilsec.com>om>; lamps-chairs@ietf.org; spasm@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5751-bis-10:
> > (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
> > 
> > On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 10:18:04AM -0700, Jim Schaad wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
> > > > Sent: Thursday, July 5, 2018 7:04 AM
> > > > To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
> > > > Cc: draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5751-bis@ietf.org; Russ Housley
> > > > <housley@vigilsec.com>om>; lamps-chairs@ietf.org; housley@vigilsec.com;
> > > > spasm@ietf.org
> > > > Subject: Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on
> > > > draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5751-bis-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
> > > >
> > > > Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
> > > > draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5751-bis-10: Discuss
> > > >
> > > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to
> > > > all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to
> > > > cut this introductory paragraph, however.)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Please refer to
> > > > https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> > > > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5751-bis/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > --
> > > > COMMENT:
> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Section 2.7.2
> > > >
> > > > With "Algorithms such as RC2"; "Algorithms such as TripleDES", I'm
> > > > not sure what to make of "such as" in these statements -- what are
> > > > the attributes that would qualify for sufficient similarity to match
> > > > the "such as", other than equality?
> > >
> > > I would probably put DES in the same category as RC2 and Camellia in the
> > same category as TripleDES.  The first category is basically - this is
> better than
> > nothing but is not secure.  The second category is basically it is not
> known to
> > be unsecure, but neither is it something that we recommend as using any
> > more.  (In this case 64-bit blocks vs 128-bit blocks).
> > 
> > My question is more, "how do we expect the reader to make these
> > classifications?"  You and I can agree on what they should be based on our
> > prior experience in the field, but not all readers will share that
> background
> > information.
> 
> I'll be honest, I don't expect readers who are not part of the world of
> cryptographic algorithms to make this type of classification.  I expect them
> to use the recommendations for what algorithms to use in the document and
> leave it at that.  I expect that this explains where things are for those
> who do know cryptographic algorithms and thus can understand some of the
> differences.

Okay.  (This is just a COMMENT, so I will trust your judgment.)

> > 
> > > > Do we need to cite RFC 6454 for the specific "web origin" concept
> > > > (as opposed to just the normal English usage of the word)?
> > >
> > > At this point in time I don't know that the idea of "web origin" is
> > > going to match what is needed for S/MIME.  I would prefer to punt this
> > > to a new document which addresses the problem directly
> > 
> > How would a reader of this document know to look for this hypothetical new
> > document?
> 
> Given that we can't point to this hypothetical document I don't think we
> can.  I think it will get some publicity when it is finally published.  In
> the mean time I expect people to slog through the eprint document and need
> to go several iterations to understand what is being said their.  They talk
> about same origin in that document.

Okay.

-Benjamin