Re: [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Transparency WG
Ben Laurie <benl@google.com> Tue, 07 January 2014 16:51 UTC
Return-Path: <benl@google.com>
X-Original-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com
(Postfix) with ESMTP id 925C21AE04E for <therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Tue, 7 Jan 2014 08:51:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.917
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No,
score=-1.917 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9,
DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622,
RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 ndz7Bs5OnIDw for
<therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 08:51:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vb0-x236.google.com (mail-vb0-x236.google.com
[IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c02::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id
C2AD61AE04D for <therightkey@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 08:51:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vb0-f54.google.com with SMTP id g10so293275vbg.13 for
<therightkey@ietf.org>; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 08:51:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=zp5FNZHHTupK76tuvls1ruY+7+jtULPpypGwnssQN60=;
b=Vg+2WfoDxJtU+8xH7ssjt7/7Ns5Br9MwgL7tNh1w38uPssyo8j5QPEjf6nF4GP9lWi
FTL0ZZTZ5Dok5vnP49+eaOsbXsmwd/HQGaRPHQIyhKy4V7N3WG8bwSliLLsYZYgWfWK2
Gbyjp0Z1wDfV1vdkP7Ozqtc1pP1skWk0m01dHSWaXcrXVJUteUKsD3xsQS6mYEhaaGE5
W6ITcZjCu/8KqazwzfPpx/QYQR8yvbQfuTNTQi7KlTzofPIZDAfWVytOZ9KEJIe3yPsf
BKLFxixuXv7CvxCX3lbnMkraJA9X0AjxNxeTuXm1UdeG5IzloazEI/d+in1NhzNstL7v 4wXg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net;
s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding;
bh=zp5FNZHHTupK76tuvls1ruY+7+jtULPpypGwnssQN60=;
b=BsNI7c6/zi75q/yj5KVyXUZeVcR/qRjsK7rAPETcJ/BlPhdfexFlP9hdfZBHAs0YDF
SZnvvyC86xNJz9j4URESavijEVY8zmVwQd+GV2+DLEYWOqwtuYw2vgZ6W/KpiPWRZWKG
TocBAh32Il+jIwgrOkvMZylRLZFkKA6DHwtvPhV2aFjdteH3CqtV87PGAlneLAAKYagp
Fbb5kqJXHpTC+im1XVWqV0e11pk9oDfqismsUFXafEzVADb6QWp+O9CLiyM988I9KWhL
CJUlWeo1YfiDtHu1cAMVc8k3ObmDqK4iDl/tUy6ODUu9Of90243SAU1Ankf8EbBMUcI8 K7EQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlh6gC+IWs8MXwYeIjfN9GQ8dg2V0ofBILMVY/QQ8AnS7bQ16ukwEmIUy90bFLNQSmp2A0hZNWTf3infxnNAEeCb+5jNxdYAitnICx/6sXEsoK1uTSRhCOZ6JCD1USFd7Ubny0Y7HK+74lR9TU3LVebXJCumAermkDUXCaqnlcs5qMg5oloOexV1NYdfEO3yzxY2JRN
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.58.85.133 with SMTP id h5mr9351235vez.4.1389113501553;
Tue, 07 Jan 2014 08:51:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.52.169.202 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 08:51:41 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <C3D78338-B351-42C3-841F-BC46075AFC80@vpnc.org>
References: <CABrd9SSRGzC1gnAm+6Wy2w3FamSgvFK09cHqPXAqH7Ky-n8wtQ@mail.gmail.com>
<C3D78338-B351-42C3-841F-BC46075AFC80@vpnc.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 16:51:41 +0000
Message-ID: <CABrd9SR3PO8X3EoDKWqNOh=iZOeaerx6JeVzXg4m46VLeNBTnA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ben Laurie <benl@google.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "therightkey@ietf.org" <therightkey@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Transparency WG
X-BeenThere: therightkey@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <therightkey.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/therightkey>,
<mailto:therightkey-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/therightkey/>
List-Post: <mailto:therightkey@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:therightkey-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/therightkey>,
<mailto:therightkey-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 16:51:52 -0000
On 7 January 2014 16:35, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> wrote: > I support the formation of this WG with basically this charter. However, having footnote in a charter make it harder to read. Having URLs that are not somewhat guaranteed to be available forever (such as those run by the IETF) make the charter unstable. A proposed editorial-only cleanup: > > Problem statement: > > Many Internet protocols require a mapping between some kind of identifier and some kind of > key, for example, HTTPS, SMTPS, IPSec, DNSSEC and OpenPGP. > > These protocols rely on either ad-hoc mappings, or on authorities which attest to the > mappings. > > History shows that neither of these mechanisms is entirely satisfactory. Ad-hoc mappings are > difficult to discover and maintain, and authorities make mistakes or are subverted. > > Cryptographically verifiable logs can help to ameliorate the problems by making it possible > to discover and rectify errors before they can cause harm. A cryptographically verifiable > log is an append-only log of hashes of more-or-less anything that is structured in such a > way as to provide efficiently-accessible, cryptographically-supported evidence of correct > log behaviour. For example, RFC 6962 says: "The append-only property of each log is > technically achieved using Merkle Trees, which can be used to show that any particular > version of the log is a superset of any particular previous version. Likewise, Merkle Trees > avoid the need to blindly trust logs: if a log attempts to show different things to > different people, this can be efficiently detected by comparing tree roots and consistency > proofs. Similarly, other misbehaviors of any log (e.g., issuing signed timestamps for > certificates they then don't log) can be efficiently detected and proved to the world at > large." > > These logs can also assist with other interesting problems, such as how to assure end users > that software they are running is, indeed, the software they intend to run. > > Work items: > > - Publish an update to RFC 6962 as a standards-track mechanism to apply verifiable logs to > HTTP over TLS. > > - Discuss mechanisms and techniques that allow cryptographically verifiable logs to be > deployed to improve the security of protocols and software distribution. Where such > mechanisms appear sufficiently useful, the WG will re-charter to add relevant new work items. OK with me. Thanks.
- [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Transpare… Ben Laurie
- Re: [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Trans… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Trans… Tim Moses
- Re: [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Trans… Ben Laurie
- Re: [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Trans… Ben Laurie
- Re: [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Trans… Tim Moses
- Re: [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Trans… Ben Laurie
- Re: [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Trans… Tim Moses
- Re: [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Trans… Ben Laurie
- Re: [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Trans… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Trans… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Trans… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [therightkey] Revised Draft Charter for Trans… Phillip Hallam-Baker