Re: [tram] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7635 (5060)
Justin Uberti <justin@uberti.name> Thu, 24 September 2020 15:51 UTC
Return-Path: <juberti@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tram@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tram@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C9563A0F26 for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 08:51:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.401
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.248, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 OhULN-Nmtbza for <tram@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 08:51:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-f51.google.com (mail-lf1-f51.google.com [209.85.167.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 714093A0F25 for <tram@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 08:51:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-f51.google.com with SMTP id y2so4437503lfy.10 for <tram@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 08:51:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=mcEyd/xnSalAW8BoTL7I8Cm1pll7KnZMb6UIVk193rs=; b=QmHuZeiHbWidL5helilmRyiU7HhiMnZOwsI678Rk0IvCUfpgh8HAbCemK88QLg+eEN rkI2MV64bajyeHsu6aN2IywY/fJbDN6tzvZDDhfMQ/Xsi8ZtVV9CgsMd8Fk3/eqFC/uo apT2ThZ7v4SK5Fu2UddxPaHAVSpPO/McxT/ew3yZcQVBtEkgppUrIjhKFS9EyVWPYqk9 +rULg6TX/SOBeYQCpdWJhX1TJlKz010WVfxYA3fzbboCfrUWhqNE6q3pUMfluEwBMg52 il9kMX6U1qBbenf1Ky9SvXG66pIWTjLUsLkeURfq+OL4YUUL+MJW07zoj7hZcIJi07UN 2Vvg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530on/WcT0A/dY78cM/TtAtXqDGrwXmcteTR4yVQ0HfGf8/TBQS7 dtDC3CPhPZreymU+CQszccaBieWlyKSa2venOyE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwSPRT3SXgiCEvvoglPS/SPNE3Vm0Oel7P/CXFuPhnYQKQtVdDStDSjsBeM0tdUzkhUWDHdKbr5rs2WJvqyGhM=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:7f47:: with SMTP id a68mr34367lfd.264.1600962677535; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 08:51:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20170705233508.0F530B80DD9@rfc-editor.org> <076210c82130159ac25a2663f331cf29af0cd28d.camel@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <076210c82130159ac25a2663f331cf29af0cd28d.camel@ericsson.com>
From: Justin Uberti <justin@uberti.name>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 08:51:01 -0700
Message-ID: <CALe60zAwEdcuncKwN5b8BoeutyqPbkSP1PjuYo1-2ArLiD_GMw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
Cc: "sperreault@jive.com" <sperreault@jive.com>, "tireddy@cisco.com" <tireddy@cisco.com>, "praspati@cisco.com" <praspati@cisco.com>, Gonzalo Camarillo <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com>, "rmohanr@cisco.com" <rmohanr@cisco.com>, "tram@ietf.org" <tram@ietf.org>, "deadbeef@google.com" <deadbeef@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b1785c05b0112b87"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tram/xVkqlyzhjxExxh1143ZdXn9acmk>
Subject: Re: [tram] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7635 (5060)
X-BeenThere: tram@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 15:51:22 -0000
This looks correct to me at first glance. Will re-read in context and give a definitive answer. On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 7:22 AM Magnus Westerlund < magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I would appreciate some response regarding this Errata. Should it be > verified, > held for document update, or rejected? > > Cheers > > Magnus Westerlund > > On Wed, 2017-07-05 at 16:35 -0700, RFC Errata System wrote: > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7635, > > "Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) Extension for Third-Party > > Authorization". > > > > -------------------------------------- > > You may review the report below and at: > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5060 > > > > -------------------------------------- > > Type: Technical > > Reported by: Taylor Brandstetter <deadbeef@google.com> > > > > Section: Appendix B > > > > Original Text > > ------------- > > [STUN] supports hash agility and accomplishes this agility by > > computing message integrity using both HMAC-SHA-1 and > > HMAC-SHA-256-128. The client signals the algorithm supported by it > > to the authorization server in the 'alg' parameter defined in > > [POP-KEY-DIST]. The authorization server determines the length of > > the mac_key based on the HMAC algorithm conveyed by the client. If > > the client supports both HMAC-SHA-1 and HMAC-SHA-256-128, then it > > signals HMAC-SHA-256-128 to the authorization server, gets a 256-bit > > key from the authorization server, and calculates a 160-bit key for > > HMAC-SHA-1 using SHA1 and taking the 256-bit key as input. > > > > Corrected Text > > -------------- > > [STUN] supports hash agility and accomplishes this agility by > > computing message integrity using both HMAC-SHA-1 and > > HMAC-SHA-256-128. The client signals the algorithm supported by it > > to the authorization server in the 'alg' parameter defined in > > [POP-KEY-DIST]. The authorization server determines the length of > > the mac_key based on the HMAC algorithm conveyed by the client. If > > the client supports both HMAC-SHA-1 and HMAC-SHA-256-128, then it > > signals HMAC-SHA-256-128 to the authorization server, and gets a > > 256-bit key from the authorization server, which can be used to > > compute both the HMAC-SHA-1 and HMAC-SHA-256-128 hashes. If the > > client only supports HMAC-SHA-1, the authorization server could > > return a 160-bit key, as keys longer than the HMAC-SHA-1 output > > size of 160-bits would not significantly increase the function's > > strength. > > > > Notes > > ----- > > The SHA-1 block size is 512 bits, so a 256-bit key does not need to be > > shortened to compute a HMAC-SHA-1 hash. > > > > Also added an example for "if the client only supports HMAC-SHA-1", to > make > > the hash agility logic more clear. > > > > Instructions: > > ------------- > > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party > > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > > > -------------------------------------- > > RFC7635 (draft-ietf-tram-turn-third-party-authz-16) > > -------------------------------------- > > Title : Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) > Extension for > > Third-Party Authorization > > Publication Date : August 2015 > > Author(s) : T. Reddy, P. Patil, R. Ravindranath, J. Uberti > > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > > Source : TURN Revised and Modernized > > Area : Transport > > Stream : IETF > > Verifying Party : IESG > > > > _______________________________________________ > > tram mailing list > > tram@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tram > -- > Cheers > > Magnus Westerlund > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Networks, Ericsson Research > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Ericsson AB | Mobile +46 73 0949079 > Torshamnsgatan 23 | > SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >
- [tram] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7635 (5060) RFC Errata System
- Re: [tram] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7635 (5… Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [tram] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7635 (5… Justin Uberti
- Re: [tram] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7635 (5… Magnus Westerlund