Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-tram-turn-third-party-authz-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
"Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <tireddy@cisco.com> Mon, 13 April 2015 14:03 UTC
Return-Path: <tireddy@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: tram@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tram@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 047AE1A6F7A for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 07:03:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 2ITotggB-rmP for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 07:03:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7558E1A700F for <tram@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 07:03:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=10482; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1428933802; x=1430143402; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=qCm4E2xJ98f5QAAIm33A/cPXfEMFkjTKnjuUe4omBiI=; b=OALGzk3YaDSKHm7UrRdRHf8/TsKsmZW35H+khMEbQkhjQSrgBJO080/U a1uqYpj42X19rggweWcYBybfgGbvKqVJ5aJ/utUV9xEPSvcrBWZ5twe+O UTNgSiTM8WTWaop41wi36PJlUq7cyu4nTNt2fgCO/uwWMYGE/keimhJWY s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DLBAAXzCtV/5pdJa1cgwxSXAWDEMEXZgmBRAqGAQIcgRs4FAEBAQEBAQF9hB8BAQEDAQEBASAROgsFBwYBCA4DBAEBAQICBhkEAwIEJQsUAQgJAQQKBAUIAYgZCA22UZYsAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBF4EhigqCX4E6EQEGGhYbDYJiL4EWBYYjiD6CK4N5hzM6gn2DP4xZIoIAAxwUgTxvAYEDBxcGHH8BAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.11,570,1422921600"; d="scan'208";a="140753050"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Apr 2015 14:03:21 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com [173.36.12.88]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t3DE3K4N030123 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 13 Apr 2015 14:03:20 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com ([169.254.15.220]) by xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com ([173.36.12.88]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Mon, 13 Apr 2015 09:03:20 -0500
From: "Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)" <tireddy@cisco.com>
To: Oleg Moskalenko <mom040267@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-tram-turn-third-party-authz-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AdB18rGIQI0mjhjpSxW/g/aJSfQSIw==
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 14:03:19 +0000
Message-ID: <913383AAA69FF945B8F946018B75898A4120CC8F@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.65.54.180]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tram/lOocj6PrujMTSz3lF5pUzuzv28s>
Cc: "tram@ietf.org" <tram@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-tram-turn-third-party-authz-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: tram@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussing the creation of a Turn Revised And Modernized \(TRAM\) WG, which goal is to consolidate the various initiatives to update TURN and STUN." <tram.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tram>, <mailto:tram-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tram/>
List-Post: <mailto:tram@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tram-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tram>, <mailto:tram-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 14:03:34 -0000
> -----Original Message----- > From: tram [mailto:tram-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Oleg Moskalenko > Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 12:35 PM > To: Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) > Cc: tram@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-tram-turn-third- > party-authz-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) > > I noticed that the encrypted token has odd number of bytes, because the > nonce_length is just one byte. I'd suggest to make it two bytes. Yes, fixed in my local copy. Thanks and Regards, -Tiru > Saving a byte by making the data size odd usually does not work well. > It is really not saving any space or CPU cycles. > > > Thanks > Oleg > > > On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 8:07 PM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) > <tireddy@cisco.com> wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Stephen Farrell [mailto:stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie] > >> Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2015 1:08 AM > >> To: The IESG > >> Cc: tram-chairs@ietf.org; tram@ietf.org; > >> draft-ietf-tram-turn-third-party- authz@ietf.org; > >> gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com; draft-ietf-tram-turn-third- > >> party-authz.ad@ietf.org; draft-ietf-tram-turn-third-party- > >> authz.shepherd@ietf.org > >> Subject: Stephen Farrell's Discuss on > >> draft-ietf-tram-turn-third-party-authz- > >> 13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT) > >> > >> Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for > >> draft-ietf-tram-turn-third-party-authz-13: Discuss > >> > >> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > >> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut > >> this introductory paragraph, however.) > >> > >> > >> Please refer to > >> http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > >> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > >> > >> > >> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tram-turn-third-party-auth > >> z/ > >> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> - > >> DISCUSS: > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> - > >> > >> > >> Edited discuss ballot after chats around Dallas. > >> > >> (1) Please fix the crypto as per Richard's discuss. (I think the plan > >> here is for Rich Salz to help with that, which I'm confident will > >> work out ok.) > > > > Yes, comments from Richard are addressed. > > > >> > >> (2) Please consider whether a signature based scheme that does not > >> require pre-shared keys between the TURN and (in particular) WebRTC > >> server could be useful to support. (Either in this document or > >> elsewhere.) There should be use cases where that offers sufficient > >> accountability for use of TURN and it ought allow some deployments > >> that are less easy with this kind of pre-shared keys approach. The > >> DISCUSS here is to check if the WG want to take that approach, either > now or later. > > > > Passive attacks could occur in TURN due to lack of integrity protection. For > example, a passive attacker could monitor Allocate request/response > between the client and TURN server and make a Refresh request with a > requested lifetime of 0 to delete the allocation. Message integrity of TURN > messages ensures that passive attacker cannot spoof subsequent TURN > messages. > > > >> > >> (3) I think the plan is to take out some of the options that are not > >> needed so as make interop more likely. > >> Please do so. (I think we discussed taking out the DKSPP stuff at > >> least, but the more options we can get rid of, the better). > > > > Yes, DKSPP is removed from the draft. > > > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> - > >> COMMENT: > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> - > >> > >> > >> - COMMENTS below are unchanged since before Dallas. > >> We can look over then as we go. > >> > >> - I really think this would benefit from some wider review and I > >> don't think it's ready as-is. > > > > This draft is also reviewed in OAuth WG. > > > >> > >> - I agree with Richard's discuss points. > >> > >> - intro: "impossible in web applications" isn't really true in > >> principle, but impossible in WebRTC as it uses JS is true. > > > > NEW: > > However, in web applications > > like WebRTC [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-overview] where JavaScript uses the > > browser functionality to make real-time audio and/or video calls, Web > > conferencing, and direct data transfer, ensuring this secrecy is > > typically not possible. > > > >> > >> - Assuming the AS that can authorize the user shares a secret with > >> the STUN server chosen by the WebRTC server seems very brittle. Why > >> would that be true in general? > > > > The AS and WebRTC server are in the same administrative domain of the > application provider. The user never sends the session key learned from the > AS to the STUN server it only uses the session key to compute message > integrity of STUN request and to validate the message integrity of the STUN > response. The STUN server will only know the session key if it can decrypt > the token. > > > >> > >> - 4.1.1: Hmmm. How many people use KeyProv I wonder? > > > > Already removed DKSPP. > > > >> > >> - 4.1.2 - which "two servers"? WebRTC can have more servers than that. > > > > The STUN server and the AS. As far as the STUN server is concerned, it only > deals with the AS of interest for key establishment. The AS could be the > application server itself or could be a Key management function syncing the > keying material to the WebRTC servers. > > > > NEW: > > The STUN and AS servers could choose to use REST API over HTTPS to > > establish a symmetric key. > > > >> > >> - 4.1.2 - now we're using TLS mutual auth? And how does the TLS > >> client know which CA to use that'll work with the TLS server here? I > >> don't think that'll scale will it? > > > > We presume the two parties involved know what CA to consider when > using the REST APIs they would have to do this to trust each other. Please > note that the AS is allocating symmetric keys meant exclusively for that > STUN Server, so some level of co-ordination is already involved. > > > >> > >> - 4.1.3 - this looks like what the WG/authors really want, would that > >> be a fair statement? > > > > As per our discussion we have changed the specification to recommend > > REST > > > > NEW: > > > > Note : The mechanism specified in Section 4.1.2 compared to REST > > lacks encryption and HMAC algorithm agility. Hence a STUN server and > > authorization server implementation SHOULD support REST explained in > > Section 4.1.1. > > > > > >> > >> - 9: Figure 2 should be way up at the top of the document and not > >> here > > > > In the previous versions it was in the top of the document but moved > down after comments received from the WG that WebRTC is only an > example usage of third party authorization. > > > >> > >> - 9: Why 5 seconds ? > > > > STUN messages can be sent over UDP, 5 seconds is to accommodate packet > loss and RTO interval. > > > > -Tiru > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > tram mailing list > > tram@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tram > > _______________________________________________ > tram mailing list > tram@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tram
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Brandon Williams
- [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-tr… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Oleg Moskalenko
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Oleg Moskalenko
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Salz, Rich
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Martin Thomson
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Oleg Moskalenko
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Oleg Moskalenko
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Brandon Williams
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Brandon Williams
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Martin Thomson
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Oleg Moskalenko
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Martin Thomson
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Oleg Moskalenko
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Martin Thomson
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Oleg Moskalenko
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Brandon Williams
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Brandon Williams
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Brandon Williams
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Salz, Rich
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Salz, Rich
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Salz, Rich
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-iet… Salz, Rich