Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security
Hasan Derhamy <hasan.derhamy@ltu.se> Thu, 09 March 2017 14:59 UTC
Return-Path: <hasan.derhamy@ltu.se>
X-Original-To: t2trg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: t2trg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC45312964D for <t2trg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 06:59:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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 dv4ghmPQcTdO for <t2trg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 06:59:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxi.ltu.se (mxi.ltu.se [IPv6:2001:6b0:10:42::42:23]) (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 9ED33129665 for <T2TRG@irtf.org>; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 06:59:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ltuex1.ltuad.ltu.se (ltuex1.ltuad.ltu.se [130.240.20.71]) by mxi.ltu.se (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v29Ex1pQ020247 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 9 Mar 2017 15:59:01 +0100
Received: from ltuex1.ltuad.ltu.se (130.240.20.71) by ltuex1.ltuad.ltu.se (130.240.20.71) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1236.3; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 15:59:01 +0100
Received: from ltuex1.ltuad.ltu.se ([fe80::c184:6d39:a728:cf6d]) by ltuex1.ltuad.ltu.se ([fe80::c184:6d39:a728:cf6d%14]) with mapi id 15.00.1236.000; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 15:59:01 +0100
From: Hasan Derhamy <hasan.derhamy@ltu.se>
To: "Garcia-Morchon O, Oscar" <oscar.garcia-morchon@philips.com>, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>, "Kovatsch, Matthias" <matthias.kovatsch@siemens.com>, "mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca" <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Thread-Topic: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security
Thread-Index: AQHSlpsig/ioJjJFqk+GH8j8vzJ1rKGJlY0AgAAQwgCAAAGWgIAAByCAgAAHRICAAPIBgIAARf+AgAAV7gCAAAQ/AIABfZAAgAAWDPA=
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 14:59:00 +0000
Message-ID: <943f8c65ea1949d684e9f7af7b86f8a7@ltuex1.ltuad.ltu.se>
References: <c15a387f-9dd3-987e-2901-b86fd8f60108@gmx.net> <10144.1488908366@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <952c4a16-174f-2457-1f11-8f733e738f90@gmx.net> <4EBB3DDD0FBF694CA2A87838DF129B3C01AA2F98@DEFTHW99EL4MSX.ww902.siemens.net> <558bae1a-ff84-9fb3-c6bf-021f492e9a04@gmx.net> <4EBB3DDD0FBF694CA2A87838DF129B3C01AA313F@DEFTHW99EL4MSX.ww902.siemens.net> <c85cbfa5-083c-9159-3e01-001b353a3e35@cisco.com> <f33f30cc-9a6d-513d-f20f-620ac4b611e1@gmx.net> <d6c78126308c4f6c94ab4a827d0a8c2e@DB5PR9001MB0165.MGDPHG.emi.philips.com>, <2669c38e-5a7e-e4a4-36d2-9fd9f7966d52@cisco.com> <03443d82f2c94a5cad12978b4a3c54e4@DB5PR9001MB0165.MGDPHG.emi.philips.com>
In-Reply-To: <03443d82f2c94a5cad12978b4a3c54e4@DB5PR9001MB0165.MGDPHG.emi.philips.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, sv-SE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [130.240.20.100]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_943f8c65ea1949d684e9f7af7b86f8a7ltuex1ltuadltuse_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/t2trg/UcqzYQxY8asFwTwz5Fq_d6VQECo>
Cc: "T2TRG@irtf.org" <T2TRG@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security
X-BeenThere: t2trg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IRTF Thing-to-Thing \(T2T\) Research-Group-in-creation" <t2trg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/t2trg>, <mailto:t2trg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/t2trg/>
List-Post: <mailto:t2trg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:t2trg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/t2trg>, <mailto:t2trg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 14:59:19 -0000
Hi, Would be interesting to see how systems of systems gets mapped within your considerations. http://sebokwiki.org/wiki/Systems_of_Systems_(SoS) -Hasan From: T2TRG [mailto:t2trg-bounces@irtf.org] On Behalf Of Garcia-Morchon O, Oscar Sent: den 9 mars 2017 15:33 To: Eliot Lear; Hannes Tschofenig; Kovatsch, Matthias; mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca Cc: T2TRG@irtf.org Subject: Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Hi Eliot, i believe that your two examples (fridge and car) describe a system (fridge and car) within a larger system (smart home or V2X). More complex scenarios exist. You could analyze such scenarios by decomposing the larger system into subsystems (domains) and applying the security considerations to each of the domains in which the "smart things or smart components" in that domain talk to each other. Does this help you further?Would you analyze this in a different way? Do you think that this explanation should be included in the our document? Cheers, Oscar. ________________________________ From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com<mailto:lear@cisco.com>> Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2017 4:46 PM To: Garcia-Morchon O, Oscar; Hannes Tschofenig; Kovatsch, Matthias; mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca<mailto:mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Cc: T2TRG@irtf.org<mailto:T2TRG@irtf.org> Subject: Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Oscar, That's a great document. In some ways, it's really several documents all rolled up into one. But Let me ask some leading questions: * Is my network-connected refrigerator a Thing or a component? * Is the thermostat in my network-connected refrigerator a Thing or a component? * Is my network-connected car a Thing or a component? * Is the engine that sits on the CAN bus a Thing or a component? What distinguishes a Thing from a component and when do your security considerations apply, and when do they not? Eliot On 3/8/17 4:31 PM, Garcia-Morchon O, Oscar wrote: Hi Hannes, the document " draft-irtf-t2trg-iot-seccons-01" summarizes protocols. But I do not think that we do this happily but seriously. Summarizing existing protocols/work is one of the goals of the document. The document also acknowledges that devices have different capabilities and requirements, also in terms of security. In my view, this fits with the idea of minimum requirements. It would be great to have your input on your use cases and your views on minimum assumptions in different deployment scenarios/security capabilities of different types of devices. Cheers, Oscar. -----Original Message----- From: T2TRG [mailto:t2trg-bounces@irtf.org] On Behalf Of Hannes Tschofenig Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2017 3:13 PM To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com><mailto:lear@cisco.com>; Kovatsch, Matthias <matthias.kovatsch@siemens.com><mailto:matthias.kovatsch@siemens.com>; mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca<mailto:mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Cc: T2TRG@irtf.org<mailto:T2TRG@irtf.org> Subject: Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Hi Eliot, this would indeed be a good conversation to have. I have tried to trigger it a couple of times in context of the IoT device classes but it is very hard to get people to state what their minimum assumptions are. I believe it has to do with the type of standardization approach we are exercising today and this gives us a hard time to describe the big picture of how the various building blocks are supposed to work together. In fact, the picture becomes extremely complex and fragmented since there are just so many options while at the same time we envision super constrained devices. The T2TRG security document (draft-irtf-t2trg-iot-seccons-01) confirms this and happily talks about normal IPsec/IKE, diet IPsec, HIP, MIKEY, OSCOAP, JOSE, COSE, etc. etc. Ciao Hannes On 03/08/2017 11:02 AM, Eliot Lear wrote: Matthias, I think the key question that everyone seems to be dancing around is this: What is an Internet host in the context of IoT? What are the minimum qualities it must possess? I don't mean this to be a vote, but more of a law of physics sort of thing. For instance, does a host have a secure unique identity? What capabilities must it have? I would expect them to be very few, but there are assuredly some... Eliot On 3/7/17 8:36 PM, Kovatsch, Matthias wrote: Fair enough. Yes, I am on this IoT Directorate. I would say a large fraction of the T2TRG participants has been arguing that the Internet of Gateways is not a good approach. Your security-related summary proves this point. I personally don't see end-to-end security happening if we keep mixing application protocols, keep using black-magic middleboxes, and keep using proprietary interfaces at the device level. We need something end-to-end (or T2T) for end-to-end security. Best wishes Matthias Sent from my phone, limitations might apply. -----Original Message----- *From:* Hannes Tschofenig [hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net<mailto:hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>] *Received:* Tuesday, 07 Mar 2017, 20:10 *To:* Kovatsch, Matthias (CT RDA NEC EMB-DE) [matthias.kovatsch@siemens.com<mailto:matthias.kovatsch@siemens.com>]; mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca<mailto:mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> [mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca<mailto:mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>] *CC:* T2TRG@irtf.org<mailto:T2TRG@irtf.org> [T2TRG@irtf.org<mailto:T2TRG@irtf.org>] *Subject:* Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Hi Matthias, I know that this is a research group and everyone can create whatever they want. We briefly talked about security at the IoT directorate conference call and I would be interesting to hear what works and what does not work for others. Ciao Hannes On 03/07/2017 07:45 PM, Kovatsch, Matthias wrote: On big propaganda tour? :P Regards Matthias Sent from my phone, limitations might apply. -----Original Message----- *From:* Hannes Tschofenig [hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net<mailto:hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>] *Received:* Tuesday, 07 Mar 2017, 19:39 *To:* Michael Richardson [mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca<mailto:mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>] *CC:* t2trg@irtf.org<mailto:t2trg@irtf.org> [T2TRG@irtf.org<mailto:T2TRG@irtf.org>] *Subject:* Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security OSCOAP does not work when * you mix protocols, * use a middlebox for some processing interactions (such as data aggregation), and * when one of the protocols is a non-RESTful protocol, such as BLE or MQTT. Unfortunately, these the use cases we are facing in current IoT deployments. For similar reasons we cannot use RFC 8075 either. Maybe you are seeing different deployment environments. Ciao Hannes On 03/07/2017 06:39 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net><mailto:hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> wrote: > Needless to say that these challenges have also been observed in other > protocols as well, such as HTTP and even SIP. > What is the story for providing application layer security? OSCOAP seems to be end-to-end to me. -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca><mailto:mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- _______________________________________________ T2TRG mailing list T2TRG@irtf.org<mailto:T2TRG@irtf.org> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/t2trg _______________________________________________ T2TRG mailing list T2TRG@irtf.org<mailto:T2TRG@irtf.org> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/t2trg ________________________________ The information contained in this message may be confidential and legally protected under applicable law. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, forwarding, dissemination, or reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
- [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Ari Keränen
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Michael Richardson
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Kovatsch, Matthias
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Kovatsch, Matthias
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Simpson, Robby (GE Energy Connections)
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Kovatsch, Matthias
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Göran Selander
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Carsten Bormann
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Carsten Bormann
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Eliot Lear
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Carsten Bormann
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Göran Selander
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Hannes Tschofenig
- [T2TRG] The Many Headed Hydra Nightingale, J. Stephen (Fed)
- Re: [T2TRG] The Many Headed Hydra Carsten Bormann
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Garcia-Morchon O, Oscar
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Eliot Lear
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Mohit Sethi
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Garcia-Morchon O, Oscar
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Hasan Derhamy
- Re: [T2TRG] RESTful Design & Security Eliot Lear