Return-Path: X-Original-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7F9C1276AF for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:17:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=office365stanford.onmicrosoft.com 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 zmFpF0r7gboV for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:17:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00000d04.pphosted.com (mx0a-00000d04.pphosted.com [148.163.149.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4656126D85 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:17:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0102889.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00000d04.pphosted.com (8.16.0.20/8.16.0.20) with SMTP id v2R4DMAM009103; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:17:09 -0700 Received: from mx0b-00000d03.pphosted.com (mx0b-00000d03.pphosted.com [148.163.153.234]) by mx0a-00000d04.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 29dnv3b4fb-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:17:08 -0700 Received: from pps.filterd (m0102883.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00000d03.pphosted.com (8.16.0.20/8.16.0.20) with SMTP id v2R4FXUR012997; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:17:07 -0700 Received: from codegreen6.stanford.edu (codegreen6.stanford.edu [171.67.224.8]) by mx0a-00000d03.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 29dq1324r4-1 (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:17:07 -0700 Received: from codegreen6.stanford.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by codegreen6.stanford.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2157146; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:17:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from NAM02-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-sn1nam02lp0016.outbound.protection.outlook.com [216.32.180.16]) by codegreen6.stanford.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5F8B54; Sun, 26 Mar 2017 21:17:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=office365stanford.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-stanford-edu; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=N7M2N4a+/m1rNAv2uSKejeIBrOb/OCn6UKhEQMIDbv8=; b=pjozuwYRPTn3/SpLJnnnDOmqo2F9yIi/b2S+4uit7HLliAqzRFv6ZqvT+EbsOIdEXDWlDqM5026zsoZrCDuG7esbLYZGw6T3NdA31p0HE3D/rLNVPA/85VslwpLo+KcixB2/jFZENMV0FmB4jYtfosQMqVQYHAXPLeTsKODZdT8= Received: from MWHPR02MB2861.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (10.175.50.136) by MWHPR02MB2862.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (10.175.50.137) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.991.14; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 04:16:53 +0000 Received: from MWHPR02MB2861.namprd02.prod.outlook.com ([10.175.50.136]) by MWHPR02MB2861.namprd02.prod.outlook.com ([10.175.50.136]) with mapi id 15.01.0991.020; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 04:16:53 +0000 From: Saba Eskandarian To: Ben Laurie CC: "trans@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Trans] Privacy-preserving proof of sct exclusion Thread-Index: AQHSpbii8uKV+c47g06WvQijP+zFvqGnVY2AgAC8Fco= Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 04:16:52 +0000 Message-ID: References: , In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=stanford.edu; x-originating-ip: [2601:647:5400:6400::91e4] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; MWHPR02MB2862; 7:GxWQ1TEJ9qGogalBEggj799vifB16YboigktmxGCXWPKQLYuBo+Qu0FnBhgNIRR1BZ5IsdcWSDZLM7/iFEmH76XgdsO8nClYIRQmOQ2y/Vs0lEe1b3kzNsbjKP2Fp13/ur5qqJDQEiTG7ntTRwhxPaX163nX1X1CyMu8R/5y3LoLGT+JaGCbC2z6enjiFh/7tGeHCPXv5swWkKGUJujtaVMSX4zGHxF2zEjZSzE9/Yqm2AF3lJUlibPoWF6dgpFZtfd0t43962FCeA2YfO+Ah+L0tWNd7D0tepOdtMxOIZrrpGfYy7Jug0qfjty8uaREFyDKI8N+jHDjcKMLnkxaWw== x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: c25ea912-3961-497c-1677-08d474c81936 x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(2017030254075); SRVR:MWHPR02MB2862; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(127643986962959)(211936372134217); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040375)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046)(6041248)(20161123555025)(20161123564025)(20161123562025)(20161123560025)(20161123558025)(6072148); SRVR:MWHPR02MB2862; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:MWHPR02MB2862; x-forefront-prvs: 02596AB7DA x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(39410400002)(39840400002)(24454002)(51914003)(377454003)(189998001)(99286003)(55016002)(7906003)(606005)(88552002)(6436002)(2906002)(54896002)(6116002)(86362001)(3280700002)(19627405001)(102836003)(9686003)(53936002)(6306002)(77096006)(33656002)(6506006)(3660700001)(229853002)(236005)(25786009)(53546009)(81166006)(38730400002)(110136004)(54356999)(4326008)(76176999)(122556002)(50986999)(75432002)(2900100001)(8936002)(7736002)(6606003)(6916009)(2950100002)(74316002)(6246003)(5660300001)(8676002)(7696004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:MWHPR02MB2862; H:MWHPR02MB2861.namprd02.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; MLV:sfv; LANG:en; spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_MWHPR02MB28614CE50312B5F12ABEB91EC3330MWHPR02MB2861namp_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: stanford.edu X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 27 Mar 2017 04:16:52.8436 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 396573cb-f378-4b68-9bc8-15755c0c51f3 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MWHPR02MB2862 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-03-27_04:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-03-27_04:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1702020001 definitions=main-1703270035 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Trans] Privacy-preserving proof of sct exclusion X-BeenThere: trans@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Public Notary Transparency working group discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 04:17:15 -0000 --_000_MWHPR02MB28614CE50312B5F12ABEB91EC3330MWHPR02MB2861namp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks for the prompt feedback! I'll make sure to address these comments in= my talk, and I'm looking forward to discussing design options in person. I= suspect that the flexibility of the tools and techniques we use as well as= the associated engineering and privacy tradeoffs will make for an interest= ing discussion. Thanks, ~saba ________________________________ From: Ben Laurie Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2017 9:46:21 AM To: Saba Eskandarian Cc: trans@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Trans] Privacy-preserving proof of sct exclusion On 25 March 2017 at 22:39, Saba Eskandarian > wrote: Hello, I'm on the agenda for Tuesday's meeting to share a privacy-preserving proof= of sct exclusion from a log (I think Eran alluded to this work in a messag= e a while ago). My posted slides will not include many words, so I wanted to share a link t= o the preprint of our academic paper on the subject in case anyone wants to= read the details there. The paper is targeted at a somewhat different audi= ence, but it can be found here: https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.02209 Thanks and looking forward to meeting you all next week! Cool, but I immediately see a problem - you require logs to be in timestamp= order, but they aren't. I can't immediately think of a way to get that pro= perty without also considerably increasing time to inclusion in the log. That seems undesirable - in fact, we're trying to go the other way, i.e. re= duce time to inclusion, in general. Also, engineering reality doesn't change, so increasing time to inclusion i= s also likely to increase MMD. Secondly, its interesting, but doesn't seem particularly useful: when an SC= T corresponds to a cert that has not been included, you want to reveal the = cert, not hide it. What you want to hide is who is revealing it. ~saba _______________________________________________ Trans mailing list Trans@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans --_000_MWHPR02MB28614CE50312B5F12ABEB91EC3330MWHPR02MB2861namp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks for the prompt feedback! I'll make sure to address these comments in my talk, and I'm looking forwa= rd to discussing design options in person. I suspect that the flexibility o= f the tools and techniques we use as well as the associated engineering and privacy tradeoffs will make for a= n interesting discussion.


Thanks,

~saba

From: Ben Laurie <benl@g= oogle.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2017 9:46:21 AM
To: Saba Eskandarian
Cc: trans@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Trans] Privacy-preserving proof of sct exclusion
 


On 25 March 2017 at 22:39, Saba Eskandarian <sabae@stanford.= edu> wrote:

Hello,

I'm on the agenda for Tuesday's meeting to share a privacy-preserving proof= of sct exclusion from a log (I think Eran alluded to this work in a messag= e a while ago).

My posted slides will not include many words, so I wanted to share a link t= o the preprint of our academic paper on the subject in case anyone wants to= read the details there. The paper is targeted at a somewhat different audi= ence, but it can be found here: https://arxi= v.org/abs/1703.02209

Thanks and looking forward to meeting you all next week!


Cool, but I immediately see a problem - you require logs to be in time= stamp order, but they aren't. I can't immediately think of a way to get tha= t property without also considerably increasing time to inclusion in the lo= g.

That seems undesirable - in fact, we're trying to go the other way, i.= e. reduce time to inclusion, in general.

Also, engineering reality doesn't change, so increasing time to inclus= ion is also likely to increase MMD.

Secondly, its interesting, but doesn't seem particularly useful: when = an SCT corresponds to a cert that has not been included, you want to reveal= the cert, not hide it. What you want to hide is who is revealing it.

~saba


_______________________________________________
Trans mailing list
Trans@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans


--_000_MWHPR02MB28614CE50312B5F12ABEB91EC3330MWHPR02MB2861namp_--