IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Trans] [saag] draft-iab-crypto-alg-agility-00

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Mon, 07 April 2014 14:01 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 887111A0708; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 07:01:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 owwoVP8OWT5G; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 07:00:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com [96.6.114.112]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BC7D1A0713; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 07:00:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C8FC480F8; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 14:00:50 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com (unknown [172.27.22.71]) by prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77F08480E3; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 14:00:50 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from usma1ex-cashub.kendall.corp.akamai.com (usma1ex-cashub5.kendall.corp.akamai.com [172.27.105.21]) by prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 355789803E; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 14:00:50 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.107.26]) by USMA1EX-CASHUB5.kendall.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.105.21]) with mapi; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 10:00:39 -0400
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: "trans@ietf.org" <trans@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 10:00:37 -0400
Thread-Topic: [saag] draft-iab-crypto-alg-agility-00
Thread-Index: Ac9SQ1iCuderyUe5RjO1bTZuczG+EAAJhb3w
Message-ID: <2A0EFB9C05D0164E98F19BB0AF3708C7120A04ED14@USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
References: <5999195E-9073-4649-A224-BF71BA61CBAF@vigilsec.com> <CAG5KPzzqSQ++YpQcnYesecL0GQ0+J0ieMXBrNk6txMAC58xEQQ@mail.gmail.com> <2A0EFB9C05D0164E98F19BB0AF3708C7120A04EBD0@USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20140406121529.0bd2d730@resistor.net> <2A0EFB9C05D0164E98F19BB0AF3708C7120A04EBD7@USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <CAG5KPzxihe+k0x0njC+BANacmrrQyfU5RAY_EYcMYW2rx8DZfw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAG5KPzxihe+k0x0njC+BANacmrrQyfU5RAY_EYcMYW2rx8DZfw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/nIJY5E-8U-I-yMKBna5hmLzOmoA
Cc: "saag@ietf.org" <saag@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Trans] [saag] draft-iab-crypto-alg-agility-00
X-BeenThere: trans@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Public Notary Transparency working group discussion list <trans.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/trans/>
List-Post: <mailto:trans@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 14:01:01 -0000

(Adding trans@ietf.org)

Me:
> CT should not be a special case exemption from the agility spec.

Ben:
> I think it should, and here's why: normally you want agility so endpoints can change their crypto in an orderly way, so as to phase out weak algorithms. In CT the endpoint is the enemy: you don't want it to be able to choose algorithms that suit it.

What is the endpoint?  The  log server?  I don't understand the point.

And as I said, why can't you get the same effect with proper use of ALL CAPS words in the RFC?

	/r$

--  
Principal Security Engineer
Akamai Technology
Cambridge, MA

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email