From owner-ietf-cat-wg@lists.Stanford.EDU Mon Oct 27 17:32:23 2003 Received: from lists.Stanford.EDU (lists.Stanford.EDU [171.64.14.236]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA22820 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2003 17:32:21 -0500 (EST) Received: (from root@localhost) by lists.Stanford.EDU (8.12.10/8.12.10) id h9RLFHdK024467 for ietf-cat-wg-out720680; Mon, 27 Oct 2003 13:15:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (nwkea-mail-1.sun.com [192.18.42.13]) by lists.Stanford.EDU (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9RLFDwV024455 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2003 13:15:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from centralmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM ([129.147.62.1]) by nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h9RLF8UP009123 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2003 13:15:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from binky.central.sun.com (binky.Central.Sun.COM [129.153.128.104]) by centralmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id h9RLF62o016462 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2003 14:15:06 -0700 (MST) Received: from binky.central.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.central.sun.com (8.12.5+Sun/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h9RLB1Qx003886 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2003 13:11:01 -0800 (PST) Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.central.sun.com (8.12.5+Sun/8.12.3/Submit) id h9RLB0u9003885 for ietf-cat-wg@lists.stanford.edu; Mon, 27 Oct 2003 15:11:00 -0600 (CST) Resent-Message-Id: <200310272111.h9RLB0u9003885@binky.central.sun.com> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 12:03:50 -0800 From: Nicolas Williams To: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com, ietf-sasl@imc.org, ipsec-policy@vpnc.org, ietf-krb-wg@anl.gov, ietf-tls@lists.certicom.com, ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, ietf-cat-wg@lists.Stanford.EDU, ips@ietf.org Cc: nfsv4@ietf.org Subject: [I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-nfsv4-channel-bindings-00.txt] Message-ID: <20031027200350.GI24528@binky.central.sun.com> Mail-Followup-To: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com, ietf-sasl@imc.org, ipsec-policy@vpnc.org, ietf-krb-wg@anl.gov, ietf-tls@lists.certicom.com, ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, ietf-cat-wg@lists.stanford.edu, ips@ietf.org, nfsv4@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Followups-To: nfsv4@ietf.org Resent-From: Nicolas.Williams@sun.com Resent-Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 15:11:00 -0600 Resent-To: ietf-cat-wg@lists.Stanford.EDU Sender: owner-ietf-cat-wg@lists.Stanford.EDU Precedence: bulk [Apologies for the cross-post; followups should NOT be cross-posted this widely. Please Cc ONLY the appropriate WG mailing list(s) on any replies. Since I am not subscribed to all of the relevant WGs' mailing lists, please Cc me in all replies.] The NFSv4 WG I-D on channel bindings needs review from several IETF WGs. This I-D, draft-ietf-nfsv4-channel-bindings-00.txt, goes along with the soon to be published draft-ietf-nfsv4-ccm-03.txt (currently: -02). We would appreciate feedback from the Cc'ed WGs on several areas as requested below. Please cc the appropriate WG lists only in your replies. The I-D announcement is included below, including the I-D Abstract. Thanks, Nico Review requests: - From all the cc'ed WGs, the security community in general and the [concluded] CAT WG mailing list: o Please review the generic definition of "channel bindings" in this I-D and the concept of "channel bindings" in general. (Use the CAT WG list and/or the NFSv4 WG list.) - From the IPSEC WG: o Please review the IPsec channel construction in this I-D and the relevant interface requirements. o Please review the IPsec channel bindings construction. (Use the IPSEC WG and/or the IPSP WG lists.) - From the IPSP WG: o Please review the IPsec channel construction in this I-D and the relevant interface requirements. (Use the IPSEC WG and/or the IPSP WG lists.) - From the IPS WG: o Please consider the channel bindings concept as a general solution to the problems with the iSCSI approach to security ("authenticate at iSCSI layer with x, y or z authentication technology, but delegate session integrity/confidentiality protection to IPsec"). See the introduction (section 1) of this I-D for a description of the problem with the iSCSI approach to security. (I realize that I'm late to the iSCSI party - my goal is not to affect the progression of the iSCSI I-Ds to Proposed Standard and publication as RFCs, far from it.) (Use the IPS WG list.) - From the TLS WG: o Please review the construction of channel bindings to TLS channels given in this I-D. (Use the TLS WG list.) - From the SECSH WG: o Please review the construction of channel bindings to SSHv2 channels given in this I-D. (Use the SECSH WG list.) - From the KRB WG: o Please review sections 3.3 and 4.5 of this I-D. (Use the KRB WG list.) - From the SASL WG: o Please review section 3.2 of this I-D. (Use the SASL WG list.) ----- Forwarded message from Internet-Drafts@ietf.org ----- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 10:50:50 -0400 From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-nfsv4-channel-bindings-00.txt To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: nfsv4@ietf.org A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Network File System Version 4 Working Group of the IETF. Title : On the Use of Channel Bindings to Secure Channels Author(s) : N. Williams Filename : draft-ietf-nfsv4-channel-bindings-00.txt Pages : 14 Date : 2003-10-23 This document defines and formalizes the concept of channel bindings to secure layers and defines the actual contents of channel bindings for several secure channels. The concept of channel bindings allows applications to prove that the end-points of two secure channels are the same by binding authentication at one network layer to the session protection negotiation at a lower network layer. The use of channel bindings allows applications to delegate session protection to lower layers. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-nfsv4-channel-bindings-00.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-nfsv4-channel-bindings-00.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-nfsv4-channel-bindings-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. ----- End forwarded message ----- -++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**== This message was posted through the Stanford campus mailing list server. If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message body of "unsubscribe ietf-cat-wg" to majordomo@lists.stanford.edu From owner-ietf-cat-wg@lists.Stanford.EDU Thu Oct 30 16:13:33 2003 Received: from lists.Stanford.EDU (lists.Stanford.EDU [171.64.14.236]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA11826 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 16:13:28 -0500 (EST) Received: (from root@localhost) by lists.Stanford.EDU (8.12.10/8.12.10) id h9UJi0vj008892 for ietf-cat-wg-out720680; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 11:44:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from vulcan.rsasecurity.com (vulcan.rsasecurity.com [204.167.114.130]) by lists.Stanford.EDU (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id h9UJhvNK008885 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 11:43:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from ebola.securitydynamics.com by vulcan.rsasecurity.com via smtpd (for lists.Stanford.EDU [171.64.14.236]) with SMTP; 30 Oct 2003 19:43:57 UT Received: from exna00.securitydynamics.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ebola.securitydynamics.com (8.12.10/NULL) with ESMTP id h9UJdEu5005957; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:39:14 -0500 (EST) Received: by exna00.securitydynamics.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id ; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:43:52 -0500 Message-ID: From: "Linn, John" To: "'Nicolas Williams'" , ietf-cat-wg@lists.Stanford.EDU Subject: RE: [I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-nfsv4-channel-bindings-00.txt] Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:43:08 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-ietf-cat-wg@lists.Stanford.EDU Precedence: bulk I've now read channel-bindings-00, and believe that it offers a valuable result in two ways: by clarifying concepts of channel bindings (which have long been one of the less well-understood aspects of GSS-API) and by defining useful concrete facilities layered on the construct. I'd encourage others to review and comment as well; in particular, the details of linkages to particular protocols should be evaluated by the experts and WGs involved with those protocols. One question: can the pseudo-mechanisms as discussed in Sec. 3.1 be used in conjunction with SPNEGO-style negotiation, or are these types of pseudo-mechanisms mutually exclusive? --jl -++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**== This message was posted through the Stanford campus mailing list server. If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message body of "unsubscribe ietf-cat-wg" to majordomo@lists.stanford.edu From owner-ietf-cat-wg@lists.Stanford.EDU Fri Oct 31 11:36:12 2003 Received: from lists.Stanford.EDU (lists.Stanford.EDU [171.64.14.236]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA06436 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 11:36:12 -0500 (EST) Received: (from root@localhost) by lists.Stanford.EDU (8.12.10/8.12.10) id h9UK5PxO010973 for ietf-cat-wg-out720680; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 12:05:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (nwkea-mail-2.sun.com [192.18.42.14]) by lists.Stanford.EDU (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9UK5KNK010968 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 12:05:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from centralmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM ([129.147.62.1]) by nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h9UK5BxA003797; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 12:05:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from binky.central.sun.com (binky.Central.Sun.COM [129.153.128.104]) by centralmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id h9UK5A2o018228; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 13:05:10 -0700 (MST) Received: from binky.central.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.central.sun.com (8.12.5+Sun/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h9UK13Qx026769; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 12:01:03 -0800 (PST) Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.central.sun.com (8.12.5+Sun/8.12.3/Submit) id h9UK12dv026768; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 12:01:02 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 12:01:02 -0800 From: Nicolas Williams To: "Linn, John" Cc: ietf-cat-wg@lists.Stanford.EDU Subject: Re: [I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-nfsv4-channel-bindings-00.txt] Message-ID: <20031030200102.GN24528@binky.central.sun.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: owner-ietf-cat-wg@lists.Stanford.EDU Precedence: bulk On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 02:43:08PM -0500, Linn, John wrote: > I've now read channel-bindings-00, and believe that it offers a valuable > result in two ways: by clarifying concepts of channel bindings (which have > long been one of the less well-understood aspects of GSS-API) and by > defining useful concrete facilities layered on the construct. I'd encourage > others to review and comment as well; in particular, the details of linkages > to particular protocols should be evaluated by the experts and WGs involved > with those protocols. Great. > One question: can the pseudo-mechanisms as discussed in Sec. 3.1 be used in > conjunction with SPNEGO-style negotiation, or are these types of > pseudo-mechanisms mutually exclusive? I was hoping to cross this bridge when I came to it. If no SPNEGO apps have ever used channel bindings (and I'm quite sure that that is indeed the case), then we could update the SPNEGO spec to say that SPNEGO only passes channel bindings to mechanisms like CCM-* or which otherwise explicitly require the use of channel bindings and that applications that use SPNEGO MUST check the actual mech output parameter of GSS_Init/Accept_sec_context() to determine whether channel bindings were used. Cheers, Nico -- -++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**==--++**== This message was posted through the Stanford campus mailing list server. If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message body of "unsubscribe ietf-cat-wg" to majordomo@lists.stanford.edu