Re: [TLS] [pkix] Cert Enumeration and Key Assurance With DNSSEC

Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com> Tue, 05 October 2010 18:40 UTC

Return-Path: <kent@bbn.com>
X-Original-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D6163A70BA; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 11:40:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.384
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.384 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.215, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9TvMxoDE4Ydu; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 11:40:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.bbn.com (smtp.bbn.com [128.33.0.80]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 333353A6FDC; Tue, 5 Oct 2010 11:40:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp89-089-180.bbn.com ([128.89.89.180]:49202) by smtp.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <kent@bbn.com>) id 1P3CRu-000AjT-Vd; Tue, 05 Oct 2010 14:41:15 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p0624081bc8d12082479b@[128.89.89.180]>
In-Reply-To: <20101004183043.733393A7052@core3.amsl.com>
References: <201010041437.o94EbTHT029454@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp> <4CA9EED5.5050006@extendedsubset.com> <20101004183043.733393A7052@core3.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 14:41:06 -0400
To: Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net>
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Cc: pkix@ietf.org, dnsop@ietf.org, saag@ietf.org, tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] [pkix] Cert Enumeration and Key Assurance With DNSSEC
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 18:40:18 -0000

At 2:30 PM -0400 10/4/10, Michael StJohns wrote:
>Hi -
>
>DNSSEC seems to be picking on PKIX and vice versa - maybe the right 
>answer is both?

I don't see the proposed work as a war between X.509 certs and signed 
DNS records. I think that they are potentially complementary security 
mechanisms.

>...
>What if - the PKIX certificate for the host contained a "permit" for 
>the name signed by the DNS owner?  A signature over the hash of the 
>public key in the certificate, and the DNS name - and maybe some 
>expiration info verifiable by the data in DNSSEC?

We have avoided putting additional signatures in a public-key cert, 
so I'm not comfortable with a proposal that does so.  Is there a way 
to reverse this, so that the cert contains a hash of a key from the 
DNS, and there is a (signed) DNS record that covers the cert?

Steve