IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Teep] [Rats] EAT claims needed by TEEP

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 11 November 2021 13:43 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: teep@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teep@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A2393A10F4; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 05:43:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=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 rJMsQqzfFGGF; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 05:43:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 793153A107F; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 05:43:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A52301801B; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 08:45:37 -0500 (EST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 8P2f3xVdLm7V; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 08:45:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A198F1800E; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 08:45:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFFBB7BD; Thu, 11 Nov 2021 08:43:31 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: teep <teep@ietf.org>, "rats@ietf.org" <rats@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAObGJnMh0+GFySpovD-YoSF34o+cMEj-h+NSMUoEiBHT8WadWQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BL0PR2101MB102770B8E03B95A44497004CA3190@BL0PR2101MB1027.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <7607E6BF-459C-4A32-AAE2-08117A97E06B@island-resort.com> <BL0PR2101MB1027EA205417DAF375BA7085A3160@BL0PR2101MB1027.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <B1FDD70B-2530-454C-90AF-F44EEDC4F1F3@island-resort.com> <AM6PR08MB342916CCDD01E8698BB3C883EF170@AM6PR08MB3429.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <2D53BD60-4FA8-4153-B28B-585E902845AE@island-resort.com> <AM6PR08MB423141370A5CE9DEF6C732C69C140@AM6PR08MB4231.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <3370D92E-23C2-41C3-B86F-A65C168E9082@island-resort.com> <AM6PR08MB42311D76B24E866812171BDC9C140@AM6PR08MB4231.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <CH2PR21MB14640330E3DA58D2144659F7A3919@CH2PR21MB1464.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <C9FCDB94-1734-4F6C-B6D9-DDB384827E06@island-resort.com> <CH2PR21MB146427B07435A5F36DAE5782A3919@CH2PR21MB1464.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <27150.1636465193@localhost> <A40BE985-E12E-4B5E-8995-F4408134AEE4@island-resort.com> <398725.1636575788@dooku> <CH2PR21MB1464 6282D207490FD0C6D69BA3939@CH2PR21MB1464.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <43D84D56-26B1-4726-A3AC-E918071592BB@island-resort.com> <CH2PR21MB1464E91FD236666F94C3A380A3939@CH2PR21MB1464.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <CAObGJnMh0+GFySpovD-YoSF34o+cMEj-h+NSMUoEiBHT8WadWQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 08:43:31 -0500
Message-ID: <21384.1636638211@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teep/FqzQr2tmbDBtzpheccBObtoGy2I>
Subject: Re: [Teep] [Rats] EAT claims needed by TEEP
X-BeenThere: teep@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: A Protocol for Dynamic Trusted Execution Environment Enablement <teep.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teep>, <mailto:teep-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/teep/>
List-Post: <mailto:teep@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teep-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teep>, <mailto:teep-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 13:43:45 -0000

Thomas Fossati <tho.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
    > Besides, it looks like we'd be creating a bad precedent because then one
    > could easily argue that *every* claim is possibly just a byte string or,
    > pushing this line of reasoning just a bit further, the whole claims-set
    > could be seen as one single gigantic opaque claim.

! make me think about the multiple levels of "comment" that occured in the
JCL days, where commands were comments...

Brendan Moran <Brendan.Moran@arm.com> wrote:
    > Strings are not the right choice for machine readable fields. There are
    > extremely good reasons not to use them. Please do not use strings for
    > model IDs.

    > When you have a string, it is inevitable that someone in marketing will
    > realise that it’s human-readable. The next step is that it must be
    > controlled to preserve brand image. When this happens, it is also
    > inevitable that *wildly incompatible hardware* with *the same function*
    > will be forced into the same “model number.”

This has happened multiple times out there.
Same box, same case, entirely different CPU inside.

    > By making model identification explicitly non-parseable by humans, we
    > prohibit its use as a controllable, human facing identifier. This
    > ensures that it has a better chance of being used correctly as a means
    > to distinguish between mutually incompatible versions.

!

mcr suggested>

  "There is no global scheme or format for this claim."
    ->
  "The format for this scheme will need to be specified within profiles that use it."


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email