IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Unbearable] HTTPSTB updates and respin WGLC

John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com> Mon, 06 February 2017 23:51 UTC

Return-Path: <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>
X-Original-To: unbearable@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: unbearable@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D70691294E6 for <unbearable@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:51:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ve7jtb-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 WXCo6UqfFo88 for <unbearable@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:51:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-x235.google.com (mail-qk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::235]) (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 CF86F1293F5 for <unbearable@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:51:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-x235.google.com with SMTP id s186so72292684qkb.1 for <unbearable@ietf.org>; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 15:51:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ve7jtb-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=4xYW9gc1EWrpp1H98R0vDtpQH+xVnxFcIuVNfJba3R8=; b=P73CFKAluZyEgqxg5L2W0TEzR1JVwqrYbspxWUCLceMlgxjCdGpLHrL1/RB4K5ADGO 0FMdZ2jkNr/dQEWp98qHKWh6YltdJ/7Dlh24PuW4zuZsyxdwsAfvkwRha2EYxQL1tF/f NLOMUPW04auGUgmrwuZo4DC5nTYx5Fd7D8yR7F1/5llPT81jqV43ZYMiqsf4Afi8qcjL g+Fs7CG+/kkzQ3RHkenYUKg1PKfhOdbEnqWbZUr1dLkdysBvzMOveuIMFZKnmtUABPje PyIyUkK+LB+Euwy3lXcIGCOSfGtFgwxqyPpoXCYmEQJAs180gUSzEDiGTnJWSh4fTJ2w mb2w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=4xYW9gc1EWrpp1H98R0vDtpQH+xVnxFcIuVNfJba3R8=; b=jRz8GEbdTJTv3yAH1mnaarP16WE1hLOfsljRg8RzkrPzoViMb36LonZaV9tlsfz6bP Fqy30X7M6OIgTJmMpOkBn7rxmwq+36BhmmE48CIFOJxCztItRx0n13Ilx4m57XpET2Tx F4tDR7iEoH2RaX7EiX8MqcRTHV1rWWlOxSSwIzZpf8p2Dux3H3Dbo/SarZNsOxu8WMh0 761dxYtyu5EUd2T2oPipo8kSI4nsTQBFe57YC4gu+UdfLWGvWpevVkH2cKHuwSGISbz+ LXA1Lvq5CSzYHodqpKR1UbPiSdJAuEDhpZ68jReEMSm4bodnVjbeRgrzIpRLl7cFYCAz YLwQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lwzAnM5ilGA7JrQp/Sar0Z+GAPBT8eGqXBrYp1A7F3+GFGhulb/RxmImA6LPNFDac3
X-Received: by 10.55.210.70 with SMTP id f67mr11445228qkj.304.1486425099833; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 15:51:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.8.100] ([181.201.111.117]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w44sm1871861qta.4.2017.02.06.15.51.37 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 06 Feb 2017 15:51:38 -0800 (PST)
From: John Bradley <ve7jtb@ve7jtb.com>
Message-Id: <6801C875-65FA-4C4F-B45B-59AD7D734845@ve7jtb.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_FA3B6F07-717C-4EC9-9338-0F7BC1F71912"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 20:51:35 -0300
In-Reply-To: <CY1PR0301MB0842D89387876FDA7713DF578C400@CY1PR0301MB0842.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
To: Andrei Popov <Andrei.Popov@microsoft.com>
References: <4ab4ab60-3798-d227-8f91-d310b5b3e9c7@KingsMountain.com> <CY1PR0301MB0842D89387876FDA7713DF578C400@CY1PR0301MB0842.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/unbearable/EsktRb9IeALoQX1eiOYQrJ6is2Q>
Cc: IETF TokBind WG <unbearable@ietf.org>, Dirk Balfanz <balfanz@google.com>, =JeffH Hodges <Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com>
Subject: Re: [Unbearable] HTTPSTB updates and respin WGLC
X-BeenThere: unbearable@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "\"This list is for discussion of proposals for doing better than bearer tokens \(e.g. HTTP cookies, OAuth tokens etc.\) for web applications. The specific goal is chartering a WG focused on preventing security token export and replay attacks.\"" <unbearable.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/unbearable>, <mailto:unbearable-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/unbearable/>
List-Post: <mailto:unbearable@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:unbearable-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/unbearable>, <mailto:unbearable-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:51:43 -0000

When do you think you guys can push “final" versions for the WG?

I am hoping we can have these specs wrapped up by Chicago.

John B.
> On Feb 6, 2017, at 3:30 PM, Andrei Popov <Andrei.Popov@microsoft.com> wrote:
> 
>> Though, in the plural case, would using "keys" rather than "key pairs" 
> work for you?
> 
> This is just aesthetic preference; I can live with either phrasing...
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Unbearable [mailto:unbearable-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of =JeffH
> Sent: Monday, February 6, 2017 10:17 AM
> To: Andrei Popov <Andrei.Popov@microsoft.com>; Dirk Balfanz <balfanz@google.com>
> Cc: IETF TokBind WG <unbearable@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [Unbearable] HTTPSTB updates and respin WGLC
> 
> cf: <https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/unbearable/current/msg01147.html>
> [ i suspect Dirk had not seen Andrei's email prior to merging PR #92 ]
> 
> Andrei wrote on Fri, 3 Feb 2017 01:51:23 +0000:
>> 
>> A few editorial suggestions below.
>> 
>>> I think this needs to be rephrased:
>>> The Token Binding ID of a TLS connection is constructed using  >> the public key OF a private-public key pair, OF which  >> the client proves possession OF the private key to  >> the server.
>> Perhaps better to just split this into two sentences:
>> 
>> The Token Binding ID of a TLS connection is constructed using the  > public key of a private-public key pair.
>> The client proves possession of the corresponding private key.
> 
> thx, queued.
> 
> 
>>> (clients use different Token Binding key pairs for different...
>>> The scoping for those Token Binding key pairs generated by Web  >> browsers in...
>>> browsers MAY use different key pair scoping rules.
>>> For privacy reasons, clients use different Token Binding key pairs  >> of the Token Binding key pair. It is possible that the Token  >> <section title="Scoping of Token Binding Key Pairs"...
>>> [...]
>> 
>> While not wrong, all these key pairs seem unnecessary. The Token  > Binding key is asymmetric, so clearly it has a private and public  > component.
> 
> It seems inaccurate and potentially confusing to speak of a singular "token binding key" when we have explicitly termed it a "private-public key pair", and it is indeed two separate (although related) artifacts.
> 
> Though, in the plural case, would using "keys" rather than "key pairs" 
> work for you?
> 
>>> contains both: a proof of possession of the provided Token Binding  >> ID, as well as a proof of possession of the referred Token Binding  >> ID  > It's a proof of possession of a Token Binding key, I think.
> 
> ok, queued, thx again.
> 
> =JeffH
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Unbearable mailing list
> Unbearable@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/unbearable
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Unbearable mailing list
> Unbearable@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/unbearable

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status