Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig
Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Wed, 13 June 2018 18:19 UTC
Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: suit@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: suit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EFC7130F75 for <suit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 11:19:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 pWNW3jt2SEUl for <suit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 11:19:51 -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 36CF4130F69 for <suit@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 11:19:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0920F300A3E for <suit@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 14:19:49 -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 1b0HyBW9d8B6 for <suit@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 14:19:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from a860b60074bd.home (pool-71-127-50-4.washdc.fios.verizon.net [71.127.50.4]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8B82F3004FE; Wed, 13 Jun 2018 14:19:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Message-Id: <20C674CE-D177-498C-BC1C-CD5D2A01DC7F@vigilsec.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B9E51B36-4B05-487F-819E-736E35969168"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 14:19:49 -0400
In-Reply-To: <31676.1528913351@localhost>
Cc: suit <suit@ietf.org>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
References: <31676.1528913351@localhost>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/suit/dK3RvsGWxN7eFiT5JtERmRhUY_4>
Subject: Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig
X-BeenThere: suit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: Software Updates for Internet of Things <suit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/suit>, <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/suit/>
List-Post: <mailto:suit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/suit>, <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 18:19:53 -0000
Michael: Thanks for reading. I think you need to look at [HASHSIG]. It uses XDR [RFC4506] to represent the signatures. The XXDR structures are in Section 7 of [HASHSIG]. Russ > On Jun 13, 2018, at 2:09 PM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote: > > > I have read the -01 draft today. > I have not read [HASHSIG] yet. > I thought I'd try reading this first, to see what questions I had. > > I have implemented COSE Sign1 with ECDSA in Ruby, so I have a grasp of > what we are trying to plug hash-sig *into*. > > > Suggestions: > 1) would the structure show in section 3 be easier if it was described by > CDDL? I'm rather unclear about this. > > 2) I din't understand section 4, where it says: > o If the 'key_ops' field is present, it MUST include 'sign' when > creating a hash-based signature. > > o If the 'key_ops' field is present, it MUST include 'verify' > when verifying a hash-based signature. > > Clearly this is not something that travels over the network. Is this > somehow indicating how to understand if one is dealing a public (verify) key > or a private (sign) key? > > 3) the variations: LMS_SHA256_M32_H20, and LMOTS_SHA256_N32_W2, etc. are > listed, but I don't know if they need to be carried in the signature > structure somehow. > > 4) I thought that perhaps we'd need CBOR or COSE specific way to transport > the signatures. I guess I shall read HASHSIG to find out what the > signatures look like. > > I understand draft-mcgrew-hash-sigs-11 is being advanced by CFRG. > I believe that SUIT should adopt this document, and should do so in the > current state. > > I would like to have some examples in CBOR/COSE worked out with private keys > available in the appendices. > > -- > ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ > ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [ > ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [ > > -- > Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works > -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- > > > > _______________________________________________ > Suit mailing list > Suit@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/suit
- Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig Russ Housley
- Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig Russ Housley
- Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig Tony Putman
- Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig Jim Schaad
- Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig Russ Housley
- Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig Dave Thaler
- Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig Brendan Moran
- Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig Russ Housley
- Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig Brendan Moran
- Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig Tony Putman
- Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig Jim Schaad
- Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig Russ Housley
- [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig Michael Richardson
- Re: [Suit] draft-housley-suit-cose-hash-sig Russ Housley