IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Uta] WGLC for draft-ietf-uta-rfc6125bis-06

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Mon, 27 June 2022 17:15 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: uta@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: uta@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5B10C15AAE6 for <uta@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 10:15:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.852
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.852 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.745, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 21G2ZqorZSVt for <uta@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 10:15:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (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 73F01C15AADE for <uta@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 10:15:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050102.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050102.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 25RFETlh014931; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:15:34 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=1E0jmlYornarQbZxyzLiHwjBHjJBoCbdWEG27jiCl8Y=; b=m7KSFH+s2URREx3xlt+xG08H/Mj4CjdmD+lnFdn6UmgZDqPlD9ZM8dnahqn6uKQ+RDDb vHBh2ZvsagA4ez1ceoryfAxsbi6DKHrTHhmKqn7JtnbjlFuC3PBgiDbxNX8wNE3EbvfK YxXs3vHYAUEqkBwvSxfIWjVGe2dubo8rWIfTmG+7s2sdhIpHOz9nQrElFaPcQJXLbHu6 OscHzR9vATG6sXLuVeW6QUKqXmakU38E8CPRQ+MdOCJoW2h0uElDS3xhMBQ7VJ9ElP2b 5/Frjv6cPJ1RIO+FNVRuy83UrVCu1mg3XaeYK11FnijYUpsljKI/bgmzZg5erIrrudot JQ==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint7 (a72-247-45-33.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com [72.247.45.33] (may be forged)) by m0050102.ppops.net-00190b01. (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3gwqek4ny0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:15:33 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint7.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint7.akamai.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 25RD7Goe005998; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 13:15:09 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.50.204]) by prod-mail-ppoint7.akamai.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3gxmvvwpsh-2 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 27 Jun 2022 13:15:09 -0400
Received: from ustx2ex-dag4mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.50.203) by ustx2ex-dag4mb7.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.50.206) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.986.26; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 10:15:09 -0700
Received: from ustx2ex-dag4mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.50.203]) by ustx2ex-dag4mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.50.203]) with mapi id 15.02.0986.026; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 10:15:09 -0700
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>, "uta@ietf.org" <uta@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Uta] WGLC for draft-ietf-uta-rfc6125bis-06
Thread-Index: Adh+m/F5NsfNlikUQICzeXBktMWF+wJLnuSAABUVDQAAN+esAAAA/LkAAFgRdQA=
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2022 17:15:09 +0000
Message-ID: <F3CB3696-F3D1-48DE-9A90-2620B2CB8DBA@akamai.com>
References: <002e01d87e9c$78a002e0$69e008a0$@smyslov.net> <032e01d8878f$c2e8f630$48bae290$@smyslov.net> <A7E6035E-7BCF-4BB3-BB87-D261ED98532D@gmail.com> <YrdXuGgMKMM+gKJn@straasha.imrryr.org> <DF17FC56-87DB-4002-B84F-A81B3AE99F83@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <DF17FC56-87DB-4002-B84F-A81B3AE99F83@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.61.22050700
x-originating-ip: [172.27.118.139]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <3B80A1A4879F3F498F75F1A6F7873160@akamai.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.883,Hydra:6.0.517,FMLib:17.11.122.1 definitions=2022-06-27_06,2022-06-24_01,2022-06-22_01
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=789 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2204290000 definitions=main-2206270070
X-Proofpoint-GUID: 6zzK6CzojcAalR6WoRRH1kFLrWakeC1R
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 6zzK6CzojcAalR6WoRRH1kFLrWakeC1R
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.883,Hydra:6.0.517,FMLib:17.11.122.1 definitions=2022-06-27_06,2022-06-24_01,2022-06-22_01
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=751 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2204290000 definitions=main-2206270071
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/uta/J0CRgdnDn8IbgEgtmbTUoGPeDQQ>
Subject: Re: [Uta] WGLC for draft-ietf-uta-rfc6125bis-06
X-BeenThere: uta@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: UTA working group mailing list <uta.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/uta>, <mailto:uta-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/uta/>
List-Post: <mailto:uta@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:uta-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta>, <mailto:uta-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2022 17:15:41 -0000

Does a DANE certificate have the same "name" as a non-DANE certificate?  If the subjectAltNAME for a DANE-based certificate is the same as for non-DANE, then yes the rules should apply. If not, no.

I cannot answer that question, and look to you experts to advise us.

Note that "validating the chain" is *not* part of 6125 nor 6125bis.  Quoting from the Applicability section:
This document addresses only name forms in the leaf "end entity" server
certificate.   It does not address the name forms in the chain of certificates
used to validate a cetrificate, let alone creating or checking the validity
of such a chain.  In order to ensure proper authentication, applications need
to verify the entire certification path as per {{PKIX}}.

Perhaps the last few words could or should be
	Such as per {{PKIX}} or {{DANE}}.

But I don't know.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email