IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Trans] Privacy-preserving proof of sct exclusion

Ben Laurie <benl@google.com> Mon, 27 March 2017 09:48 UTC

Return-Path: <benl@google.com>
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 B227D1294C2 for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 02:48:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 zH20MhpC1BqE for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 02:48:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-x229.google.com (mail-vk0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::229]) (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 4D63B1294B8 for <trans@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 02:48:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vk0-x229.google.com with SMTP id z204so45109667vkd.1 for <trans@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 02:48:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=VjjkOEAUtS6j9MUOWdw3ng3Y3ZBUKKdz3Z/TgAzJxiY=; b=BHvFdocaJZ73D+TYakKot3he54fy+GSH/Ial/i/YHEfMAPfssZbqE26aC+ZJFP0jWN GCw35k2BDD4R12WYvt4ufMSDyXvY1a+RuTCMcWscG9MJkYWvZOaaKeWR6WGFYI1Jg0vK BfYCCTsUmy/NZYHH1z2O0izyTOkI/ef7DJzivK/FPVhwwRHWdUXw1aEVxtJ2YSI1jQWG RYIjxCyWt4NxwZUdBLS7lzfYYgAfYb1D69dTyubxxwDQLaAxwbUGori75Og4pBTDe8Cd OtRxRteTknH847Gw4kg99ZWWt+LrE97Vo0YpEkx6CboSweM7nRmVWUsAA4QpRS22/6pu Uo7g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=VjjkOEAUtS6j9MUOWdw3ng3Y3ZBUKKdz3Z/TgAzJxiY=; b=WIR7zSFQzg9XBV3pdu1I8HyITY7VJyKX00XGWqEVNfD/idlDSLWp33Gk2f3EX6bSyQ ZtNs8EH6Lq37nWeqx7vecHbkVNVLCujG3roo7163QwnWMahmWtw7cOiw2/+8/HDiGQAb Q9BXvGvD+wXstOkw85WEONA0jpTB77gffhZab62jVAQq7OLi9ae8YBJorJJvXbmulu1V WzWaWTDpsLFGuO5xMJBokutXrWUJkexqinbDNNdM6piDFCmFGptTxajAacWHkgLg9+lx 7G7hwboGmlJNI4sHpjJIa167QPbV+ENOXzIOYcAK3p1b0o92Bp6b8ZKcCi7Z9LoMfNkv enxw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H13zrpey87iTW7ZD63RozzKqzfp/t4IJtUKYyNStwNP4nHp1opb0V9RnY4acFih+BEfUbOS/ySfOO4Wi/+Z
X-Received: by 10.176.82.92 with SMTP id j28mr4629886uaa.130.1490608092064; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 02:48:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.31.174.73 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Mar 2017 02:48:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <MWHPR02MB28614CE50312B5F12ABEB91EC3330@MWHPR02MB2861.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: <MWHPR02MB2861B9B66FE5AE28613ECFB5C3310@MWHPR02MB2861.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <CABrd9SQDDBmmaOFn5Nk24qe-WyPYJGx02-PrYNPzr+oqd1braQ@mail.gmail.com> <MWHPR02MB28614CE50312B5F12ABEB91EC3330@MWHPR02MB2861.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
From: Ben Laurie <benl@google.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:48:11 +0100
Message-ID: <CABrd9SQ7iAU4sPQyhvs21+ccRgQJ4vW09ugJQWiURm63pvP6xg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Saba Eskandarian <sabae@stanford.edu>
Cc: "trans@ietf.org" <trans@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c191e48d41a45054bb33db6"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/xfgNaAiKXRwwXJCafwF8kpfF_dM>
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 <trans.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 27 Mar 2017 09:48:15 -0000

On 27 March 2017 at 05:16, Saba Eskandarian <sabae@stanford.edu> wrote:

> 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
> interesting discussion.
>

Afraid I won't be there, but looking forward to hearing more.


>
> Thanks,
>
> ~saba
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Ben Laurie <benl@google.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
>> message a while ago).
>>
>> My posted slides will not include many words, so I wanted to share a link
>> to 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
>> audience, 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 property 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.
> reduce time to inclusion, in general.
>
> Also, engineering reality doesn't change, so increasing time to inclusion
> 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
>>
>>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email