From nobody Thu Oct 1 00:58:17 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 832281B2B91 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 00:58:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.61 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.61 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 n3lF8fDmp0dr for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 00:58:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AE081B2B93 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 00:58:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.140] ([80.92.119.87]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Mhhr5-1a4KQh0Do3-00MwLF for ; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 09:58:12 +0200 To: "cose@ietf.org" From: Hannes Tschofenig Openpgp: id=071A97A9ECBADCA8E31E678554D9CEEF4D776BC9 Message-ID: <560CE760.6060801@gmx.net> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 09:57:20 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="2kV8jma4R286nFQpTNQ8xOwufCaoDoI21" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:VWeEJt4m30gZnRPkEnsTn6lU+Xd9jsRlO+9mphi2NHuXI8Wzq1Q 3Wvd9q0rihIijYD0+5ci+IL5+GQpkEYBh6UXE4V7JP/sF7yCB4TCsLhQ/qRCa0Lg+/c9qug Y6fBBSm1qNG+1gq5XrR0sqvAkiqUDa99AUPtWfsUbKUonz5kH3RGoAMZlgg+GeFGbd/Z/Ok xTxn8NMMIHKSnRR4ypMdA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:VryGoM3GSnc=:7TxzzH1AdesuglpCCe5Si8 MZ2XGXlyfegIVN8aPkS9RBMkwBHXElumpmVC0WaLfuuHdvk41uLo/ko6g9TwIoW3bNsvx9FLN h2d7Qg8sa76t9XwvkPIAQOd9BQRzjw5x3WUpnEOc1COf6Na2w25+MdWBko4F5XCAlpV1ouWST xeJPugdHZygcgOM4wv1htx8iRnILgcgQjdWAirzf4/Vz6dft+1JTVstyo9cUlijHxX3smot34 +tIspzPKIZS7IsZAVCJLra7Rz0OrKxg3WIoaM9RAc15KUFJeBkaw/IxlRGJvqdoZ04At9ke2t csQRBCAVX9e4BDQ0twqiFr57tqlFyIxciV8p/3HfWva1maNd1tz4ycbiTPvedqjbeq6Sqd8ro LskxmV+b0hMjHnz97YOsHKsKWVcDYcimDFUtEGkya4EX2dJyFtSW15Ck+6lFAfW7fgHmLPt3Z 3BlQjTt8A3AH2ZIURHAbcbCG1cC2qc0E2p35/82Jh7rVipdCra/S5Ji23hMwRBHhG2xLTu0s1 TeHzDceHb2HzfJGUct7gyj1xVWC+VZWOCrGZb0tOrI05oyBSJ7m96et+89BkB0eh55bRbED5e VYd7z+Qkv05OVGmlksNuE5D8bFDGCL8cjcEUEXA8wFPtonrd16Vvmu7Jshcxdw6SIYDazZltV T10PtpYNBjPwdzsyU0K+/XWpA/qYsZYBKrBmn0q3fsovv3aQesGQCIkEqRzBcEHS+50dQ+1HR WjHudooWMKg+uVQ6k3VQblpyQP0RE+zu6diYmfiENbgIM+mIbb6NcCn1I/M= Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] Signing Structure X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 07:58:16 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --2kV8jma4R286nFQpTNQ8xOwufCaoDoI21 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, in an attempt to create a signed payload I read version -05 of the document. The introduction starts with long description of various sophisticated features and this intro raises a few questions. Example #1: Text describes features that are actually not provided by the specification. Here is text: "Examples of parameters about the content would be the type of content, when the content was created, and who created the content. Examples of parameters about the signature would be the algorithm and key used to create the signature, when the signature was created, and counter- signatures. " Content type, algorithm and counter signature are existing header parameter but there is nothing that describes when the content was created, when the signature was computed or who created the signature based on the table in Section 3.1. I suggest to not talk about features the specification does not provide or to add those features. Example #2: Multiple signatures For example, the COSE_Sign structure might include signatures generated with the RSA signature algorithm and with the Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) signature algorithm. As indicate in a reference to RFC 5752 this features was copied from CMS.= I have been wondering about the complexity of an implementation. What functionality is mandatory to implement and what can be omitted? For example, do we need to create profiles of the COSE spec to only implement a subset of the functionality that does not process multiple signatures? Furthermore, I noticed that several IPRs have been filed for RFC 5752 and I am wondering what this means for the COSE work. I would like to avoid running into patent problems with features that I don't even see a need for. Is it possible for implementations to not support those features? When I tried to create an example signature COSE message based on the description on page #15 I came up with something like this: [ 1, // signed message h'', // no protected header=09 {}, // no unprotected header // payload with message "This is the content." h'546869732069732074686520636f6e74656e742e', [=09 [ h'', // Protected header - none { 1: 2, // kty (mandatory parameter # - EC2 for Elliptic Curve Keys w/ X,Y Coordinate pair) 2: h'43010233', // key id value of 0x01,0x2,0x3 1:-7 // algorithm value for ES256 }, // Unprotected header // signature h'6d9d88a90ef4d6d7c0079fb11a33c855e2274c773f358df43b68f7873 eeda210692a61d70cd6a24ba0e3d82e359384be09faafea496bb0ed16f02091c4 8c02f33574edab5b3e334bae68d19580021327cc131fbee38eb0b28289dbce118 3f9067891b17fe752674b80437da02e9928ab7a155fef707b11d2bd38a71f224f ' ] ] ] Is my understanding of the description correct? The placement of the attributes in the header parameter is less clear to me. What if an implementation places them in the wrong place? Imagine if I put the kid in the example above in the outside header? In the above example I am wondering whether the kty is indeed a mandatory algorithm. It does not seem to be needed at all. Ciao Hannes --2kV8jma4R286nFQpTNQ8xOwufCaoDoI21 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWDOdgAAoJEGhJURNOOiAto0gH/3eKwRwoCt95kmLrpgachw78 mA0+DDScXN9SlTueq2Y5C8y3fD6CrU2RgyA+vxb9FKTDF6O5ZmybOpxVuyUznQGX +okZUY1crSaeUSnpdV2NPKsLN9u0TOA0W80bkywu30/gNK+fNlqugS33HuUfLyNG Grh3PvOyN4NHOLxo8rAhnYv/G0VV7OlPhIZW0i8noeFyvVE9UgEcKWr4OyKhVbVZ BeMGRnpj7oqp220xrRTiXLye/gyLtMq1d348eO6gIvwOkXsmt7btvQ+GVukH0dWd 1Fv3GSxs6EueZKHi6aVjJxxqOAiWyQtS5h1g0VZoX5KPxon7uTldF6hkZBYeMWk= =HKXY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --2kV8jma4R286nFQpTNQ8xOwufCaoDoI21-- From nobody Thu Oct 1 00:59:10 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 772E31B2B75 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 00:59:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.61 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.61 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 ZbglGbByv9kB for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 00:59:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DD3C1B2B8E for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 00:59:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.140] ([80.92.119.87]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M8MyE-1ad78W2PZ4-00vu7O for ; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 09:59:02 +0200 To: "cose@ietf.org" From: Hannes Tschofenig Openpgp: id=071A97A9ECBADCA8E31E678554D9CEEF4D776BC9 Message-ID: <560CE792.9080807@gmx.net> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 09:58:10 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="cKu6U4m5gfAOUX3Ti8s6Va82ksJ2mOVxr" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:ve094Kwgu7S4wCr32xG75HA+WjrzbcUq9bNAdQExE85ZaLWgdle I8j1heyS0xo37vwyYyFWN5iZXkUtD1CiBketlW+5S/n1PlDJ2IAnjjEA7KS21jJCgaOcj9Y XZbEZ9dcmVesu//fVi7IhnMQEl39kM2K1Byhuyqr5iIJFYVZb+1lrFivxFYxNn3LaaXJrvl aPCQZZaNCyGNexGW4MTJA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:l1F19jbIrO0=:vfNLegazbovskVWOH7J9t8 kftGzjAkbG1E23r+EFT4OjqQIBIstGtSQl/HDnxpSXRkHMeQP1OwjmbvZl5OGY1491XZ1OcdV r30pkXK5TVlAiGwamDJPgULlKRwgEQq++iQy07wY4AQGJj5I9+SAP0/FiKVdKKZ38dQ4U/E8S CvT6dcCPlRgbXHhSPvdp5204IgQJOi8liHc8KkGcsx7ZId6jrSjevqrGTTdhiHKCyCEeCLxxO ONnjGzxPTm97ZoOjoshdakT5r8n3cqqwHiKg1I+JSY2BNPhrHOXq0LEXbXnQBTcznbtOTjs+k Ho+aLP6PAiSJsw/gBnSoRKZHJzIL58YHbQSj03ixqaz6hHZohs5d5rVRbK2OS2xNizbNr3ewY 60NI/KDBw3KoaIZAvMNCqowoJt5wB0HEYbrLPmSHY07t3bvpFcmp1122axaQyq7+IHnn2Q097 fRfi1/lfyjNRcQlmePBlYkhyyITPH+GZZBoS0DThqpPt9pO0v2l7SH3D3XMBgiFUU8ex8u1oa KNwy5XqK5ArW9+myZ1DWOgw4QC93Obz/ZeN6xoDCPr5uAGes1HIxLwHLGauYgx4Rg/NVe0niJ RUApjJSQUZhZRc1qh91XsYOmiSsHt+wCGHNaYn/kSMZ5WLntLImmga5UaiR9GxzwiS0ABiFc8 Sx1mcHZvGC16Qojxb+FsMNm+jcrPOh0Ugi/SXCC9QWhGXzhSNw+gPjOQD2ofAtghjheJd2zoF oCUN1QIlVLMiomuefrl2nxUic1pDy6SMAXTkZ6cpi5H1MfCPSX//K4jNZVg= Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] Replay Protection X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 07:59:07 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --cKu6U4m5gfAOUX3Ti8s6Va82ksJ2mOVxr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, currently there are no fields that help with reply protection in the COSE specification (although in practice with other protocols the nonce will be re-purposed as a sequence number field). I was wondering whether others in the group thought it would be useful to add a sequence number and a timestamp field to the header parameter registry for those applications that do not want to use the externally supplied data capability for providing replay protection. Ciao Hannes --cKu6U4m5gfAOUX3Ti8s6Va82ksJ2mOVxr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWDOeSAAoJEGhJURNOOiAt6NQH/RlvTkOB9z6d8rUkQb8sCHD2 UzO72Dxz5jPxuOn78NcsWMUuvJVQ6rHvmi/XGgV3rR092OkqftmYzZ/lWWeLPhyX IYOnqotpoNuN543f2hQgiZrvWkQ2dOdNEp6HUyWUuKHn4LtaBWolHKc7pWLv4f/n N1AeyJktrCIA5LsSCfkJzn6FtKryiXOcQb2lxxoVMZQQCCwsN//2k+R9/NhsJg6D aqYNX66WuQLVQx0aPy1iilhWAvHMnrrQYhTpnyp8/NgZjha98q1N0rDNSmRLvl2N ywetKgNISRnx+LBCtoHk4StQuWzohfn0ALklISBN+o1/un+8t0LKCmChek4knrE= =VGq8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --cKu6U4m5gfAOUX3Ti8s6Va82ksJ2mOVxr-- From nobody Thu Oct 1 01:33:34 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7881E1B2BDD for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 01:33:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no 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 h9xL_1qiE5cM for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 01:33:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 6A6701B2BDC for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 01:33:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.201.11]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t918XPL3028472; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:33:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from alma.local (eduroam-pool8-077.wlan.uni-bremen.de [134.102.6.76]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nRSQY51qMz4q4j; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 10:33:25 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <560CEFD4.5060103@tzi.org> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 10:33:24 +0200 From: Carsten Bormann User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.5 (Macintosh/20150923) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hannes Tschofenig References: <560CE760.6060801@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <560CE760.6060801@gmx.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Signing Structure X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:33:33 -0000 Hannes Tschofenig wrote: > Example #2: Multiple signatures Different algorithms are one example for using this, but more important may be protecting the same information within different security contexts. Re profiles: Generally, I would expect individual specifications such as OSCOAP to specify how they want to use COSE. Some COSE implementations will then be specific to one such use, others will try to be generic. Re mandatory parameters: Again, I think many of these should be able to come out of the security context (or possibly protocol context) if desired. Grüße, Carsten From nobody Thu Oct 1 02:08:02 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D28F51B2BFF for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:08:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.61 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.61 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 SMEKdAkhaPVm for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:07:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6E9E1B2BFD for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:07:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.140] ([80.92.119.87]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M1nbu-1aWWVC1m0I-00tlWS; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 11:07:48 +0200 To: Carsten Bormann References: <560CE760.6060801@gmx.net> <560CEFD4.5060103@tzi.org> From: Hannes Tschofenig Openpgp: id=071A97A9ECBADCA8E31E678554D9CEEF4D776BC9 X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Message-ID: <560CF763.3050704@gmx.net> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:05:39 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <560CEFD4.5060103@tzi.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="csHMpve8eHe1jPrcSLVR8fghbQhlxD57n" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:4aqw4zwOxFRr71SYjrdZ7uXGjb5SoN6tIoln6a/GjjkG13YaPXH eGtH2gt5ibAVEtF96poNXb8Jo9lQqBSwOzzK91ZAvHeYUoC3E+5AH7shLXZka9tgx/ZAVMW J27lqzoI/tY2eubSUk2Rkjy0wmiM58hazQK0hHMXiyxirnhOLjDkTFZtuLi6ku1EfP8biW9 hXhIMLZZ1fdg5gyIoG8GQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:7T+VQdGcwCc=:/8kPxpN/NeATh8oIcsZzJ0 BMWd52LmZib/KWr4ZD32A61Wi+ps7Aq3vTk4JvxlFW1eQn6F7XRGnZJpWZrsLfDdUCaAt5e6v O/trbMatCwUu4TX8U55eC11NMuWBJNBCua2Qm7rU8n+wYb1hdWpsAieS4aINQC8OtKhk5I6N3 GFCSeInRvOxqVkch3VR9+Yarws58SQz5NwOCV/q2GWLSO06TChDTJXRNDjIg3/CQYF5WiXoIF sepvuL+sDjpynTQ1+sKMCMrOXWYRZtKZVgNs6tP8HJRRKv9ebGHd+HnSMYfYcdUhlG+5eOzAL W9qWP8JvnLI2zLRbNbkfQY1QRFBAZovZjPU0++cfwwTCqWZkhisjbhFPzYIxo9qzT8hY+FMZ4 ZebhK9Mm3BLnDM1bzywHRiL5wyfoNOwQ4lsIRlmMAOeQgzaDp7qxnAZgwN/lNtJh55ozMQ1hf 62/BL5u10dHVwAnB53sx0oK+eJ4sZSe7NE/HSFrzFq+SiwHRIadeimJeFw3Eaw9I8VQMVcvCb 2V/jN69rtoSDvjCTcNw/LaUNHxLbF88zN22W6Da6IAYLN8ksYoBfG9K3fmRhNfQR+jyUPC0k6 d53jcxodvYBZlWBYUjGqo0r0F2gwAJvj9qPIZ1nO032fZ37m1x/IrcVThu7X7Vca7fYkCplkS rJJxvLmbjJ2rtVQLCVZaZN4c4aua89XhuQQmF/PiEQJgSNeKzE9TtgE7alvVneHXG58FuVeow llI92o7tBDNZjzcC9vA0QWCq9Uf3/jUV77KGraup8OZDNFylXlfNq6HxsLo= Archived-At: Cc: "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Signing Structure X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 09:08:01 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --csHMpve8eHe1jPrcSLVR8fghbQhlxD57n Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Carsten, I would have thought that you are receptive to this concern given that you always want to reduce code size, message size, etc. Clearly this feature does not reduce complexity. I personally have not heard about the use case where IoT devices send and receive messages that are covered with signatures computed by different algorithms because they have so many implemented. I don't recall that our use case document points to such a use case either. I believe our task is not to find all theoretically possible approaches but rather to find out whether this is an absolutely necessary feature. Otherwise I fear that we have CMS + extensions in a different binary encoding. Ciao Hannes On 10/01/2015 10:33 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote: > Hannes Tschofenig wrote: >> Example #2: Multiple signatures >=20 > Different algorithms are one example for using this, but more important= > may be protecting the same information within different security contex= ts. >=20 > Re profiles: Generally, I would expect individual specifications such a= s > OSCOAP to specify how they want to use COSE. Some COSE implementations= > will then be specific to one such use, others will try to be generic. >=20 > Re mandatory parameters: Again, I think many of these should be able t= o > come out of the security context (or possibly protocol context) if desi= red. >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose >=20 --csHMpve8eHe1jPrcSLVR8fghbQhlxD57n Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWDPdjAAoJEGhJURNOOiAtF2UH/3asr2Qo8VJceNh7SO3pXRWH bWbsPjq1U/1IkfvgKOIfBWCSdFVmxWpPg5j3ywahvlWTIh31tpn3zB4Rvrmk1r8x xre6/mAPAkjrHyZostmQnH79GeuFbs/qIPWTqEiOremcrTd+CyhZSg1EF1ZPE1qk h4IW9It8rURLnxSeCC0TGyZeGLsPsE/HeqLBrR30N5Dm/BuhZUOr9SoK5NIjjvUA g7G0RQVuJAxGQhy2wpqc7bAmWHZybKDpjvMXDWVB65dAoHummJLsfmAu9Fb5sr50 t5wlKvUWbdDXJ9kKRp2G6MN6zl8W2eR6/M7FrZg2Dhn8y0Tu/TgCNfSaG0UtGVE= =8uwT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --csHMpve8eHe1jPrcSLVR8fghbQhlxD57n-- From nobody Thu Oct 1 02:21:17 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE26A1A0262 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:21:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.15 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.15 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no 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 bIwlL0ULwndk for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:21:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 F18261A0217 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:21:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::b]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t919L78k021289; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:21:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from alma.local (eduroam-pool8-077.wlan.uni-bremen.de [134.102.6.76]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nRTTb26Mvz4p7x; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:21:07 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <560CFB02.50008@tzi.org> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 11:21:06 +0200 From: Carsten Bormann User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.5 (Macintosh/20150923) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hannes Tschofenig References: <560CE760.6060801@gmx.net> <560CEFD4.5060103@tzi.org> <560CF763.3050704@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <560CF763.3050704@gmx.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Signing Structure X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 09:21:16 -0000 We are talking about signatures, so we are mostly in class-2 land. You would do signatures to do third-party verifiability. But you also may have operational reasons to sign. So that might make two signatures (OK, one might often be a MAC.) We certainly want to avoid loading simple implementations with complexity. But it is still OK to enable more complex implementations to have complexity as long as the cost is zero or near zero for the simple ones. Simple things should be simple, complex things should be possible. Grüße, Carsten From nobody Thu Oct 1 02:29:53 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 677E21A03AA for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:29:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.61 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.61 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 yhG5wgA30Cf8 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:29:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4B551A03A9 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:29:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.140] ([80.92.119.87]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LsTDk-1aejM53BBg-0124D1; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 11:29:41 +0200 To: Carsten Bormann References: <560CE760.6060801@gmx.net> <560CEFD4.5060103@tzi.org> <560CF763.3050704@gmx.net> <560CFB02.50008@tzi.org> From: Hannes Tschofenig Openpgp: id=071A97A9ECBADCA8E31E678554D9CEEF4D776BC9 Message-ID: <560CFC6E.8060303@gmx.net> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:27:10 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <560CFB02.50008@tzi.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="HGTRJWq020i8nuv9tH9tdkJu6xLhqv9tA" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:8OO6OHAtwKWgGQESrPcTRW5Oe5scqAQz7lv7UGAF1K93pfTuntR C4FnNQH3Snww0+9BmO5sBKXWC2B32GfYHGLikVGYywCteV1AFKwjLA60qI5dEA79kCYXXOg uI5NC3mzANVMJqmtqf1wC3Q4rlG6exDm2U2EpzntK965onLFfUNXc4Du2Pj1GPTsUcmVCw+ hloPF/9QU0S2/KcAtV9og== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:QVdW63rk/8A=:dQzelFEn/t+QW2EB57mjie US1OEW3TfXMqojgaXauHIULp7927iHW1Qoo2LmXZgr+/PWTy+eWcIRqCgLGEQDlCFF8w2dXEc 2fUX9c62tiC5nZTtcGeymzbxWQOHBHOdiOplE1inERLf4nIvuSFIKBFH0xMGvL1b571lAyLE3 Vx1+jCJDacWf4TK/PVgOdiW86XreTDnuqx+0YnWy4p/L4pENIDu2qFk2511zHW/U6gjgxwQ7k YgAn1LfTq87MwhBr1Tm/b57jVc5pVsNDEtMsXZJjqJZVSSGKvqetA+z7nLB4W54bZrI+pnqjV t8grDmipgpWjRAG00UWIHRYvb4NlQtI0g3XiA0G/r/gWev9xsyapmk74KtexsGzirqDiXz8DE H9hJZCkqVgpXBNsWu2Oj1E+WFYw4QVoUdEuzn2FcvZy93MlvVRS6ds6N2fDgzxC/hqiIs1OrF lIWRb/tbn5VuFEIKnjVxnv8H6DuQa/+RQXL1Y/sOOQcBpnwMiG4DY2LBg1fOt/0rXjTt8O6KO d2Wwa01XLQk4ajNABZ0baIC25LRIZKJEY3tuoTzSDi8vLFzJrKSlegCgQQB9X8NIcLsj86/45 ylRY4HGiVzxw724rkBj2Cu6ZyPUTJvKyPSmqUKI/uMOZ9kPW4WYv2xTCTacZT+aXnQTnuxLQ0 GHvgU94MRttpWpqsDfGyoUzAnYHFuKeG1akzpKsXC8Gkm9XM+jGuj7pZN6fN/2/ylXMp6//oi rYWNXxmgY+gAs+QKdk9uYAnzJNALz13IIfpJYdymaKUoDVc7d2TcMSZcYdA= Archived-At: Cc: "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Signing Structure X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 09:29:52 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --HGTRJWq020i8nuv9tH9tdkJu6xLhqv9tA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Carsten, I am perfectly fine with using digital signatures and I expect them to be used in many circumstances. The use of public key cryptography offers many benefits over symmetric key cryptography. However, the described functionality in the COSE draft goes way beyond that simple scenario. It talks about adding * multiple signatures for multiple recipients, and * multiple signatures for a single recipient where the same message is signed with different algorithms (RSA and ECDSA is mentioned as an example). I just have not seen those use cases. Ciao Hannes On 10/01/2015 11:21 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote: > We are talking about signatures, so we are mostly in class-2 land. > You would do signatures to do third-party verifiability. > But you also may have operational reasons to sign. > So that might make two signatures (OK, one might often be a MAC.) >=20 > We certainly want to avoid loading simple implementations with > complexity. But it is still OK to enable more complex implementations > to have complexity as long as the cost is zero or near zero for the > simple ones. >=20 > Simple things should be simple, complex things should be possible. >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose >=20 --HGTRJWq020i8nuv9tH9tdkJu6xLhqv9tA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWDPxuAAoJEGhJURNOOiAtELUH/AgCbuFYKIInMcFv0I8XyreL vny5zMJVBAu+2zGjJx2Lr54s4s8pcmxFaVQrxTKD/HCurqiVgcsqk760brglmVZe RXVjNSgWL8DCihRBrV9Nus4K0AuwY813IglM8936ORQ1IWEg0XYhR3gNISFVUOwv UxH+J8zitPgwE2wutqrwJc8Va1TzX61msvlkzufGf0yu6AWx8H15kQrT8wT74PPj w2A+nuaB6xqcjJQNT8Z2l66E3MyzXyZXgnITWL4srlC4wX0Thmh4YIF815rJc42F 5u6mB7RyS+bjRcpwD46+AfByt1YzZa/MUHxMCztG6NIlJ3M/we49fBa0uy8IhUw= =Mliy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --HGTRJWq020i8nuv9tH9tdkJu6xLhqv9tA-- From nobody Thu Oct 1 03:15:07 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99CB21A1ABF for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 03:15:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no 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 fBed2017hKLX for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 03:15:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 B3DED1A1ABC for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 03:15:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::b]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t91AF1pk028120; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 12:15:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from alma.local (reingewinn.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.218.123]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nRVgn0Pcdz4pjg; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 12:15:01 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <560D07A4.7090709@tzi.org> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 12:15:00 +0200 From: Carsten Bormann User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.5 (Macintosh/20150923) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hannes Tschofenig References: <560CE760.6060801@gmx.net> <560CEFD4.5060103@tzi.org> <560CF763.3050704@gmx.net> <560CFB02.50008@tzi.org> <560CFC6E.8060303@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <560CFC6E.8060303@gmx.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Signing Structure X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 10:15:06 -0000 Hannes Tschofenig wrote: > I just have not seen those use cases. That would have more bearing on the question at hand if the difference between providing the encoding possibility for 1 or n signatures were significant. Grüße, Carsten From nobody Thu Oct 1 03:27:37 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0D2B1A1B2B for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 03:27:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.61 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.61 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 qYtKfrjVkudj for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 03:27:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E5C51A1AC2 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 03:27:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.131.140] ([80.92.119.87]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MaV3V-1ZwmaY3nRJ-00KAnT; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 12:27:32 +0200 To: Carsten Bormann References: <560CE760.6060801@gmx.net> <560CEFD4.5060103@tzi.org> <560CF763.3050704@gmx.net> <560CFB02.50008@tzi.org> <560CFC6E.8060303@gmx.net> <560D07A4.7090709@tzi.org> From: Hannes Tschofenig Openpgp: id=071A97A9ECBADCA8E31E678554D9CEEF4D776BC9 Message-ID: <560D09BD.7010604@gmx.net> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 12:23:57 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <560D07A4.7090709@tzi.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="JEheGmxIT0BMT0dHjvOtve8l38231U2Tr" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:cUsvAQtKbbCZaTHycjHlUAEUooySv0lt9uZNRpATEQu5SEMwrTd 6avEFngki/PvvkuDMF6kN8aL69qKg3rtIesg3hI8/5ceotZ/nPl5OQZg4+9vZbdmWkPtb4X qRKOqhACzGe69CvbdSkKQ1RmUMKFtEry7bL31TvmOk0MYkYzkJ4KcdBnSgbpIr+gHRXWZNq lDAxEJUIX3jObhrxfaEZg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:Lke9qg3lw0U=:dsbFj27XZ47wnG/NOr2PXA F2NAt/fXLCNDOLB/8hLfIvW0eQ8G6UqevZveQzq9YOVkvWOyFNO7QT6ekporXa7u7J1X3sB60 OCxOBhCysynhp4+k2FLNtjU38Vbb27Iun5cLHUrcSFUBwOpEk5jgqjVXu/UzHsU8zSv17gl90 LQHhxgGXi639COOrlPKTPr4wuHlStn7YKAO3ktWUwNGjYE9wpm9vtVb36cPzpbcNW7n6SlIUa WX7HBpeGjR/SFNlRTgK2AVDjs5EQ6f11B+dlF9+EdS9/MmagTo1wIHNAyOnaR1lRUFE4fwTKW UEm8S5c6zSeZeeuHnKtHEyAY3rAdjFeyn9ZvBGSrRMJ1J5nDXpgnuCF5qXJwjMyMfOE6kSTjl kbPdxfWZzrEvACEpIgTZA6XL/pjKU5Ulnn55si0AGNIld8tXOGscdABMNR0VIt0TCJnub+5C/ JtxfBRUvdNsLtCsqWVfLH4sJgv54DQeg+85MaLIcmVE7aKZUZ0xqMipanJKUmt/BTjzwrAeEb qyKWD/gjl/uTy8MgzMm22EwdGBfReRszRM+RhnW3lq+MZ2zc4cifzqon1AVjaHsomQ82H1rSp EA4j39ZdL7IqmU/6pirwQdVoUsx92xDXIekqNi0BW+woXFyqibRsP/jXorCvHlcO8Era2F99j tYrfJ8hfckP2L6PcYd1FpCFyHb97wnn9ivL9JZpFUfNZIJh14E/iXeJyzE3Snf/926DhNmixD n1jiPeGwlamwGs0dYXEHkb953iYGtkIp+/KV9D8yFJlXMsQV8/d4vFPbizg= Archived-At: Cc: "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Signing Structure X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 10:27:35 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --JEheGmxIT0BMT0dHjvOtve8l38231U2Tr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Carsten, if my implementation has to be prepared to receive and process multiple signatures then this obviously has a significant implication on the performance and the code size. That's why I asked what the story is to create a profile of the COSE spec that says "MUST NOT send" or MUST discard payloads with multiple signatures. Of course, not having multiple signatures in the first place would make the basic spec easier. Ciao Hannes On 10/01/2015 12:15 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote: > Hannes Tschofenig wrote: >> I just have not seen those use cases. >=20 > That would have more bearing on the question at hand if the difference > between providing the encoding possibility for 1 or n signatures were > significant. >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose >=20 --JEheGmxIT0BMT0dHjvOtve8l38231U2Tr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWDQm9AAoJEGhJURNOOiAtqlQH/ApTKZd50dWJKuVCkVDaXwjU MHfe1LQxxiNxlcGlI3m9aPtXrOnIMV8pFvtWdx69jEBGhP3R7uZ6EQkJlqhq/n+o pKISTas4Qt4gjqkqhKQIULbLReOvq52+W3+2cuOANbOzmqbYwkxzp/YMyuJsgjF/ CNZQnOMjwHg3DmubpQauwT60fYbiTrtsshs1XnvVFege8AUwRTYv2rleZcCQ8BQ9 IkH6QAsgHBu/oEFk+hk8XdUEKam6dN6qRNNZtv5hQni6MEaMbKbZLd6l5WVDPolF jHaypIskWU3/hcy8+vv+aNgNdtV9z/qeSVdRN21R9kX/RADckbM2/glzimXCnG4= =8F33 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --JEheGmxIT0BMT0dHjvOtve8l38231U2Tr-- From nobody Thu Oct 1 03:55:03 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB1131A1B6D for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 03:55:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no 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 NUQoVI-pHx5f for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 03:55:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 AB5BD1A1B6C for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 03:55:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.201.11]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t91AsvB9003160; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 12:54:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from alma.local (reingewinn.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.218.123]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nRWYr6SWmz4ppb; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 12:54:56 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <560D10FF.4020408@tzi.org> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 12:54:55 +0200 From: Carsten Bormann User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.5 (Macintosh/20150923) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Hannes Tschofenig References: <560CE760.6060801@gmx.net> <560CEFD4.5060103@tzi.org> <560CF763.3050704@gmx.net> <560CFB02.50008@tzi.org> <560CFC6E.8060303@gmx.net> <560D07A4.7090709@tzi.org> <560D09BD.7010604@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <560D09BD.7010604@gmx.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Signing Structure X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 10:55:01 -0000 Hannes Tschofenig wrote: > Hi Carsten, > > if my implementation has to be prepared to receive and process multiple > signatures then this obviously has a significant implication on the > performance and the code size. > > That's why I asked what the story is to create a profile of the COSE > spec that says "MUST NOT send" or MUST discard payloads with multiple > signatures. Ah, good. That is exactly what I was assuming we were doing. Indeed, it is worth having some introductory material in the draft that explains that not all implementations will need all functions and that a specific usage of COSE may want to constrain it. (This also has a bearing on the question of "mandatory to implement" algorithms -- what does that even mean when a specific usage rules them out again?) > > Of course, not having multiple signatures in the first place would make > the basic spec easier. (Yes, but not by much. The pain we'll have when we finally integrate this will be much higher. YAGNI, I know, but this one is too easy.) Grüße, Carsten From nobody Thu Oct 1 21:42:23 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1588C1A0104 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 21:42:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 MrwUVd0Y7lm5 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 21:42:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp3.pacifier.net (smtp3.pacifier.net [64.255.237.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C78BD1A0102 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 21:42:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (c-24-21-96-37.hsd1.or.comcast.net [24.21.96.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp3.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EDE7538EFE; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 21:42:19 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: "'Hannes Tschofenig'" , References: <560CE792.9080807@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <560CE792.9080807@gmx.net> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 21:39:49 -0700 Message-ID: <000601d0fccc$5f6e0c80$1e4a2580$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQLqcbdmhAv56FCT904Qt1Hf27XFj5wktQMw Archived-At: Subject: Re: [COSE] Replay Protection X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 04:42:22 -0000 I think this would be useful, but would like to see some details on what = should be there. For timestamp - what format of timestamp should be used. For replay protection - do you need just a nonce, or to do you think we = need the full set of three values: Transaction ID, Sender Nonce, = Recipient Nonce? Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: COSE [mailto:cose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Hannes = Tschofenig > Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 12:58 AM > To: cose@ietf.org > Subject: [COSE] Replay Protection >=20 > Hi all, >=20 > currently there are no fields that help with reply protection in the = COSE > specification (although in practice with other protocols the nonce = will be re- > purposed as a sequence number field). >=20 > I was wondering whether others in the group thought it would be useful = to add a > sequence number and a timestamp field to the header parameter registry = for > those applications that do not want to use the externally supplied = data capability > for providing replay protection. >=20 > Ciao > Hannes >=20 From nobody Thu Oct 1 22:08:09 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A86961A03A6 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 22:08:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 N6a5RtzDOb2i for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 22:08:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0138.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.138]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 904921A026F for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 22:08:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=HfO7GdKwKBOLipVYePgi/FRLQ9q1D/SKw6O1YEVKJsc=; b=fjwa0+oV9N91Q9HZgJeIDiZ2NCuldB/nkn5y/JvW2RnjkrEZvOif3sdzFjqwJhXIYygjq4fe14W5faz6ILkf8kfLLwEDTu9YL+p/cU/0Is51+cndVhGh9DuDWu6qdDm39BNm5ZvvMhGRDF+7QUBvjSgjeYcPUxJ7p8PS85VOfRo= Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.145) by BY2PR03MB444.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.154) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.280.20; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 05:08:00 +0000 Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) by BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) with mapi id 15.01.0280.021; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 05:07:59 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: Jim Schaad , 'Hannes Tschofenig' , "cose@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [COSE] Replay Protection Thread-Index: AQHQ/B8PgiYNpaFjIEKaMX3I9UoxFJ5XoH+AgAAHnIA= Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 05:07:59 +0000 Message-ID: References: <560CE792.9080807@gmx.net> <000601d0fccc$5f6e0c80$1e4a2580$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: <000601d0fccc$5f6e0c80$1e4a2580$@augustcellars.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; x-originating-ip: [50.47.89.201] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR03MB444; 5:Qweii8MfqMmHpHQO4j8yRfynMpwbe/TubdcaBVWVZ464YzWWN7HgOLuDOMjtrJ3rYG+Lav7hG/Zrv2F0XSBh58vvaM08CM0U2cX2oMgdoOgTkT1SIJD79UmcBeNbRpkI+v5KpX5YMQp2doUe3oAV5A==; 24:disM6HgN5P/d04nlPEH0sUiGguzdk4g3A4TUf0qHLg5tlfdZUJ5PdmQYW8SKu879AXNZnXttSOWm6Ggzf8VMlJBuiw0px1e+rAhz4BX2msE=; 20:ir0QPWD2d5Fb32ea0IM1o1rq4/GLBvifWLm2XVns9QN8GtZbU0dIp9dExYI37oLvK7D4+zN4WtF3+Z1bKnqcdg== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR03MB444; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425024)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(61426024)(61427024); SRVR:BY2PR03MB444; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR03MB444; x-forefront-prvs: 0717E25089 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(53754006)(189002)(199003)(13464003)(5001960100002)(64706001)(2501003)(76176999)(74316001)(77096005)(5001770100001)(97736004)(5004730100002)(15975445007)(66066001)(99286002)(62966003)(101416001)(87936001)(86362001)(551934003)(5005710100001)(86612001)(33656002)(5002640100001)(19580405001)(105586002)(54356999)(10090500001)(50986999)(40100003)(10290500002)(92566002)(10400500002)(19580395003)(2950100001)(5008740100001)(8990500004)(106356001)(81156007)(4001540100001)(122556002)(12110500001)(68736005)(5001860100001)(106116001)(5001830100001)(2900100001)(102836002)(5003600100002)(189998001)(77156002)(76576001)(5007970100001)(107886002)(46102003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR03MB444; H:BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 02 Oct 2015 05:07:59.0703 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR03MB444 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [COSE] Replay Protection X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 05:08:07 -0000 The answer is very much "it depends". Different applications need differen= t kinds of replay protection. That's why this field should be part of the = application payload and defined by the application - not part of the crypto= graphic envelope. -- Mike -----Original Message----- From: COSE [mailto:cose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jim Schaad Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 9:40 PM To: 'Hannes Tschofenig'; cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Replay Protection I think this would be useful, but would like to see some details on what sh= ould be there. For timestamp - what format of timestamp should be used. For replay protection - do you need just a nonce, or to do you think we nee= d the full set of three values: Transaction ID, Sender Nonce, Recipient No= nce? Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: COSE [mailto:cose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Hannes=20 > Tschofenig > Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 12:58 AM > To: cose@ietf.org > Subject: [COSE] Replay Protection >=20 > Hi all, >=20 > currently there are no fields that help with reply protection in the=20 > COSE specification (although in practice with other protocols the=20 > nonce will be re- purposed as a sequence number field). >=20 > I was wondering whether others in the group thought it would be useful=20 > to add a sequence number and a timestamp field to the header parameter=20 > registry for those applications that do not want to use the externally=20 > supplied data capability for providing replay protection. >=20 > Ciao > Hannes >=20 _______________________________________________ COSE mailing list COSE@ietf.org https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3a%2f%2fwww.ietf= .org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fcose&data=3D01%7c01%7cMichael.Jones%40microsoft= .com%7c4806246199e746df6c1d08d2cae3dde2%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%= 7c1&sdata=3DoYaVCwskkw32KHv3%2bFI7T7EaP9%2fKAJaf9arHSCnOVks%3d From nobody Fri Oct 2 23:04:23 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B9CE1B34AE for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 23:04:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 PNsJTWpxyGOk for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 23:04:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp3.pacifier.net (smtp3.pacifier.net [64.255.237.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A05E1A1A5B for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 23:04:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (c-24-21-96-37.hsd1.or.comcast.net [24.21.96.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp3.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7583538F10; Fri, 2 Oct 2015 23:04:19 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: "'Hannes Tschofenig'" , References: <560CE760.6060801@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <560CE760.6060801@gmx.net> Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 23:01:48 -0700 Message-ID: <014601d0fda0$fdb5f720$f921e560$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQHBen/SMAW1+6ntKMBKVfF0oMrC8554SMEg Archived-At: Subject: Re: [COSE] Signing Structure X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2015 06:04:22 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: COSE [mailto:cose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Hannes = Tschofenig > Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 12:57 AM > To: cose@ietf.org > Subject: [COSE] Signing Structure >=20 > Hi all, >=20 > in an attempt to create a signed payload I read version -05 of the = document. >=20 > The introduction starts with long description of various sophisticated = features > and this intro raises a few questions. >=20 > Example #1: Text describes features that are actually not provided by = the > specification. >=20 > Here is text: >=20 > "Examples of > parameters about the content would be the type of content, when the > content was created, and who created the content. Examples of > parameters about the signature would be the algorithm and key used = to > create the signature, when the signature was created, and counter- > signatures. > " >=20 > Content type, algorithm and counter signature are existing header = parameter > but there is nothing that describes when the content was created, when = the > signature was computed or who created the signature based on the table = in > Section 3.1. >=20 > I suggest to not talk about features the specification does not = provide or to add > those features. That makes total sense. I will make a note to update the spec to meet = this requirement. >=20 > Example #2: Multiple signatures >=20 > For example, the COSE_Sign structure might include signatures = generated with > the RSA signature algorithm and with the Elliptic Curve Digital = Signature > Algorithm (ECDSA) signature algorithm. >=20 > As indicate in a reference to RFC 5752 this features was copied from = CMS. >=20 > I have been wondering about the complexity of an implementation. What > functionality is mandatory to implement and what can be omitted? For = example, > do we need to create profiles of the COSE spec to only implement a = subset of > the functionality that does not process multiple signatures? My expectation is that applications are going to need to make profiles = of the COSE spec. They are going to need to say which of the top level = things need to be supported - not everybody needs encryption, not = everybody needs signatures. They are going to need to say which = algorithms need to be supported. Do you do 2 different AEAD algorithms = and at what sizes of authentication tags and key sizes? >=20 > Furthermore, I noticed that several IPRs have been filed for RFC 5752 = and I am > wondering what this means for the COSE work. I would like to avoid = running into > patent problems with features that I don't even see a need for. If you had looked at the IPR statements filed you would have noticed = that they all had to do with EC cryptography. If you want to avoid = these then I guess we should avoid EC cryptography. =20 >=20 > Is it possible for implementations to not support those features? >=20 > When I tried to create an example signature COSE message based on the > description on page #15 I came up with something like this: >=20 > [ > 1, // signed message > h'', // no protected header > {}, // no unprotected header > // payload with message "This is the content." > h'546869732069732074686520636f6e74656e742e', > [ > [ > h'', // Protected header - none > { > 1: 2, // kty (mandatory parameter > # - EC2 for Elliptic Curve Keys w/ X,Y Coordinate pair) > 2: h'43010233', // key id value of 0x01,0x2,0x3 > 1:-7 // algorithm value for ES256 > }, // Unprotected header > // signature > h'6d9d88a90ef4d6d7c0079fb11a33c855e2274c773f358df43b68f7873 > eeda210692a61d70cd6a24ba0e3d82e359384be09faafea496bb0ed16f02091c4 > 8c02f33574edab5b3e334bae68d19580021327cc131fbee38eb0b28289dbce118 > 3f9067891b17fe752674b80437da02e9928ab7a155fef707b11d2bd38a71f224f > ' > ] > ] > ] >=20 > Is my understanding of the description correct? I don't think that you need to have the kty parameter. In fact I think = that it is not defined to be in that location. Why do you think it is = mandatory? There is a difference between a key structure and a = recipient structure. Where do I need to make this more clear. >=20 > The placement of the attributes in the header parameter is less clear = to me. > What if an implementation places them in the wrong place? Imagine if I = put the > kid in the example above in the outside header? This ties back to your original comment in this message. Attributes are = supposed to be at the correct level for when they are needed and used. = If you placed the kid in the wrong location, my implementation would = fail to find the key because it has no way to identify the key. If you = did this with two different signers, then either one would overwrite the = other, leading to a failure to validate in the event you were willing to = look in other locations for the kid. >=20 > In the above example I am wondering whether the kty is indeed a = mandatory > algorithm. It does not seem to be needed at all. As noted above - I do not think the text says that it should be there. = Please tell me what lead you to think it was. (It is not present for = any of the examples Jim >=20 > Ciao > Hannes >=20 From nobody Sat Oct 3 13:17:15 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DE181B37AC for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 13:17:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 koTlDhEloJ1i for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 13:17:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp3.pacifier.net (smtp3.pacifier.net [64.255.237.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DDC321B37A6 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 13:17:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (173-8-216-38-Oregon.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.8.216.38]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp3.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3920F38F1F; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 13:17:12 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: "'Hannes Tschofenig'" , References: <560CE792.9080807@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <560CE792.9080807@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 13:14:38 -0700 Message-ID: <018301d0fe18$21d7b7c0$65872740$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQLqcbdmhAv56FCT904Qt1Hf27XFj5wnTHkg Archived-At: Subject: Re: [COSE] Replay Protection X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2015 20:17:14 -0000 Hannes, I have been thinking a bit about the concept of timestamp. When you say = this, do you mean a creating time rather than a third party timestamp? = If you are looking at something other than a statement of creation time, = what would it be? Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: COSE [mailto:cose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Hannes = Tschofenig > Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 12:58 AM > To: cose@ietf.org > Subject: [COSE] Replay Protection >=20 > Hi all, >=20 > currently there are no fields that help with reply protection in the = COSE > specification (although in practice with other protocols the nonce = will be re- > purposed as a sequence number field). >=20 > I was wondering whether others in the group thought it would be useful = to add a > sequence number and a timestamp field to the header parameter registry = for > those applications that do not want to use the externally supplied = data capability > for providing replay protection. >=20 > Ciao > Hannes >=20 From nobody Sat Oct 3 13:47:22 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 037BE1B37E8 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 13:47:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 TT26xkM2L6wa for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 13:47:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp4.pacifier.net (smtp4.pacifier.net [64.255.237.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B7C351B37E7 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 13:47:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (173-8-216-38-Oregon.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.8.216.38]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp4.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 371AF38F3F; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 13:47:19 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: "'Hannes Tschofenig'" , References: <560CE760.6060801@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <560CE760.6060801@gmx.net> Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 13:44:45 -0700 Message-ID: <019401d0fe1c$56e63050$04b290f0$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQHBen/SMAW1+6ntKMBKVfF0oMrC8555P9+g Archived-At: Subject: Re: [COSE] Signing Structure X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2015 20:47:21 -0000 I went through your example with a fine tooth comb and have some more = comments > -----Original Message----- > From: COSE [mailto:cose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Hannes = Tschofenig > Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 12:57 AM > To: cose@ietf.org > Subject: [COSE] Signing Structure >=20 > Hi all, >=20 > When I tried to create an example signature COSE message based on the > description on page #15 I came up with something like this: >=20 > [ > 1, // signed message yes > h'', // no protected header yes > {}, // no unprotected header yes > // payload with message "This is the content." > h'546869732069732074686520636f6e74656e742e', yes > [ > [ > h'', // Protected header - none yes > { > 1: 2, // kty (mandatory parameter > # - EC2 for Elliptic Curve Keys w/ X,Y Coordinate pair) No - this field should not be present in this context - note that you = also have an id number conflict with algorithm below As I said earlier - please let me know why you thought this field should = be here. It is coming from the wrong table. I would like to get this = cleared up in the document. > 2: h'43010233', // key id value of 0x01,0x2,0x3 No - this should have a id number of 4 (from the table in section 3.1) - = thus 4:h'43010203', // key id value of 0x01, = 0x02, 0x03 > 1:-7 // algorithm value for ES256 Yes > }, // Unprotected header > // signature > h'6d9d88a90ef4d6d7c0079fb11a33c855e2274c773f358df43b68f7873 > eeda210692a61d70cd6a24ba0e3d82e359384be09faafea496bb0ed16f02091c4 > 8c02f33574edab5b3e334bae68d19580021327cc131fbee38eb0b28289dbce118 > 3f9067891b17fe752674b80437da02e9928ab7a155fef707b11d2bd38a71f224f > ' Right type of thing here Jim > ] > ] > ] >=20 > Ciao > Hannes >=20 From nobody Sat Oct 3 17:32:25 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9B551B2CD7 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:32:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 tiriwfdmc7Sw for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:32:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp3.pacifier.net (smtp3.pacifier.net [64.255.237.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A6B81B2CCA for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:32:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (winery.augustcellars.com [206.212.239.129]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp3.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5D11C38F1E for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:32:17 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 17:29:43 -0700 Message-ID: <01c401d0fe3b$c458e4b0$4d0aae10$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AdD+O3NkZt+X1JuqTlilCzkmWPRZuQ== Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] Compression of content X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 00:32:23 -0000 I intend to remove the parameter which tags the ability to do compression of content. I do not believe that this is of interest in the IoT world. If it becomes necessary later for other systems it can be defined then. Jim From nobody Sat Oct 3 18:20:59 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33BFB1B2DCC for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:20:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 b4v_REAGr_uZ for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:20:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext3.iad.github.net [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB6C71B2DCA for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:20:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2015 18:20:55 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1443921655; bh=woyoo7lc6ogA13CEFZsV/SwdE3JnZ7QEbXQKNGYCIvo=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=qlEpvLcwvGf9BnIL2rgPwr5dYCgHipMa8bBYOEYYfBbNtxFSmeqrCuljxA7onxBwI 8fTeA7f+sHWSpJK4eVmPHwYEVCiX7sazPfzgfHdt7IpN5a3CVMSplG/hPZarjWdp6q EF9uxq/onV2UTsQKT+5y9Yr0wRcJoB197RTpOcx4= From: Jim Schaad To: cose-wg/cose-issues Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56107ef7271e_5a5d3fbbdb23f2b82086a0"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: jimsch X-GitHub-Recipient: cose-ietf X-GitHub-Reason: comment X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: cose@ietf.org Archived-At: Cc: cose-ietf Subject: Re: [COSE] [cose-issues] Algorithms: Should we have support for password based algorithms (#6) X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: cose-wg/cose-issues List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 01:20:57 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56107ef7271e_5a5d3fbbdb23f2b82086a0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #6. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/cose-wg/cose-issues/issues/6#event-426097297 ----==_mimepart_56107ef7271e_5a5d3fbbdb23f2b82086a0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #6.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56107ef7271e_5a5d3fbbdb23f2b82086a0-- From nobody Sat Oct 3 18:21:00 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C0741B2DCA for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:20:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.349 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_08=1.651, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 GLCohJ6RCjhJ for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:20:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext8.iad.github.net [192.30.252.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C98A1B2DCB for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:20:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2015 18:20:54 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1443921654; bh=DzuZcoycBmrSXbGZmZs5LyRBC6vi+mMkSZ9dDFAlf/A=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Ft8Lrn6bKxRSUadvInfxdKJEQI2/UFUT/pKVRUlqsGZy+GiohXf3Jh07bIwi18P5J 5vfkOXsp3Q1fzZJ6j2hKCJc9meV2yjpA8ctlmK+KsyzHlqArttWO7hZ9/N2+1CnCS8 vAMKqiGEieTwJtWVTG2MrxqNvD4odl288KLMAe2k= From: Jim Schaad To: cose-wg/cose-issues Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56107ef6ae7a5_597c3fbbdb23f2b893044"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: jimsch X-GitHub-Recipient: cose-ietf X-GitHub-Reason: comment X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: cose@ietf.org Archived-At: Cc: cose-ietf Subject: Re: [COSE] [cose-issues] Algorithms: Should we have support for password based algorithms (#6) X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: cose-wg/cose-issues List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 01:20:57 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56107ef6ae7a5_597c3fbbdb23f2b893044 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Removed from the draft --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/cose-wg/cose-issues/issues/6#issuecomment-145304396 ----==_mimepart_56107ef6ae7a5_597c3fbbdb23f2b893044 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Removed from the draft

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56107ef6ae7a5_597c3fbbdb23f2b893044-- From nobody Sat Oct 3 18:24:02 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CED61B2DE0 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:24:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 rCGvl9FiYqGJ for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:24:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp1.pacifier.net (smtp1.pacifier.net [64.255.237.171]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D0081B2DDE for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:24:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (winery.augustcellars.com [206.212.239.129]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp1.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C63A82CA22 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:24:00 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 18:21:27 -0700 Message-ID: <01c501d0fe42$fe257a30$fa706e90$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AdD+QqNVySs9YXxqTVGb4l89rbYpgA== Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] The use of RSA algorithms X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 01:24:02 -0000 I am intending to remove all RSA algorithms from the document. It does not seem that this is going to be used by the IoT world due to size. It does mean that the only signature algorithms left are going to be EC algorithms which might be an IPR issue but RFC 6090 hopefully addresses that problem. I will be starting a local document on GitHub which will keep the RSA text for either restoration if needed or for a new document. Jim From nobody Sat Oct 3 19:15:36 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C6EE1B2E73 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 19:15:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no 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 4U-g6uTOgXve for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 19:15:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 E907A1B2E72 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 19:15:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::b]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t942FOW2009363; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 04:15:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nar.local (p5DC7F6AE.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.199.246.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nT7v02XSCz4p2H; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 04:15:24 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <56108BBB.7030105@tzi.org> Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 04:15:23 +0200 From: Carsten Bormann User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.5 (Macintosh/20150923) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jim Schaad References: <560CE792.9080807@gmx.net> <018301d0fe18$21d7b7c0$65872740$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: <018301d0fe18$21d7b7c0$65872740$@augustcellars.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: 'Hannes Tschofenig' , cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Replay Protection X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 02:15:34 -0000 The TCG "TPM_CURRENT_TICKS"/"TickStampBlob" [sic] is one time stamp that is not dependent on real time (which a constrained node may not have available to it): Tick Count Value (TCV) – The count of ticks for the session. Tick Increment Rate (TIR) – The rate at which the TCV is incremented. There is a set relationship between TIR and seconds, the relationship is set during manufacturing of the TPM and platform. This is the TPM_CURRENT_TICKS -> tickRate parameter. Tick Session Nonce (TSN) – The session nonce is set at the start of each tick session. (I don't think we need the TIR.) Grüße, Carsten Jim Schaad wrote: > Hannes, > > I have been thinking a bit about the concept of timestamp. When you say this, do you mean a creating time rather than a third party timestamp? If you are looking at something other than a statement of creation time, what would it be? > > Jim > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: COSE [mailto:cose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Hannes Tschofenig >> Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 12:58 AM >> To: cose@ietf.org >> Subject: [COSE] Replay Protection >> >> Hi all, >> >> currently there are no fields that help with reply protection in the COSE >> specification (although in practice with other protocols the nonce will be re- >> purposed as a sequence number field). >> >> I was wondering whether others in the group thought it would be useful to add a >> sequence number and a timestamp field to the header parameter registry for >> those applications that do not want to use the externally supplied data capability >> for providing replay protection. >> >> Ciao >> Hannes >> > > > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose > From nobody Sat Oct 3 19:22:40 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEAB91B2E8D for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 19:22:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no 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 TnbsNyoVyyr8 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 19:22:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 78F821B2E8C for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 19:22:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::b]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t942MVnA026827; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 04:22:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nar.local (p5DC7F6AE.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.199.246.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nT83B6H3Kz4pKS; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 04:22:30 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <56108D66.40804@tzi.org> Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 04:22:30 +0200 From: Carsten Bormann User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.5 (Macintosh/20150923) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jim Schaad References: <01c401d0fe3b$c458e4b0$4d0aae10$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: <01c401d0fe3b$c458e4b0$4d0aae10$@augustcellars.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Compression of content X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 02:22:38 -0000 Interesting. -- With the JOSE versions of these parameters already defined, what is the practical effect of not having that parameter here? Implementations that want it are likely to simply use it anwyay. (However, in JOSE this is a "MUST understand" parameter -- if we don't have it initially, it can't be that, and the usage it is going to get anyway is maybe perilous.) -- More meta: Are we really in the business of guessing what is of interest in the IoT world? Where we optimize specifically for the IoT world, we of course have to. But do we have to make a consensus decision about that for every single parameter of JOSE? Grüße, Carsten Jim Schaad wrote: > I intend to remove the parameter which tags the ability to do compression of > content. > > I do not believe that this is of interest in the IoT world. If it becomes > necessary later for other systems it can be defined then. > > Jim > > > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose > From nobody Sat Oct 3 19:36:32 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A15EF1B2EB3 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 19:36:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 eLv9WDeX0ugD for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 19:36:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp3.pacifier.net (smtp3.pacifier.net [64.255.237.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27A111A070E for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 19:36:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (winery.augustcellars.com [206.212.239.129]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp3.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9E92638F1D; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 19:36:28 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: "'Carsten Bormann'" References: <01c401d0fe3b$c458e4b0$4d0aae10$@augustcellars.com> <56108D66.40804@tzi.org> In-Reply-To: <56108D66.40804@tzi.org> Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 19:33:55 -0700 Message-ID: <01d001d0fe4d$1db5e060$5921a120$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQGLSi46CvNF2pX8+9Owndt0tLSnDwGMTUDontmixMA= Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Compression of content X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 02:36:30 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Carsten Bormann [mailto:cabo@tzi.org] > Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2015 7:23 PM > To: Jim Schaad > Cc: cose@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [COSE] Compression of content >=20 > Interesting. >=20 > -- With the JOSE versions of these parameters already defined, what is = the > practical effect of not having that parameter here? Implementations = that want > it are likely to simply use it anwyay. > (However, in JOSE this is a "MUST understand" parameter -- if we don't = have it > initially, it can't be that, and the usage it is going to get anyway = is maybe > perilous.) Are you arguing that we should keep it? Going either way is easy, but = pulling it is a quicker finish. >=20 > -- More meta: Are we really in the business of guessing what is of = interest in the > IoT world? Where we optimize specifically for the IoT world, we of = course have > to. But do we have to make a consensus decision about that for every = single > parameter of JOSE? This is why I am advertising what I plan to do. So that people have a = chance to give a solid argument to keep it if they think it should be = kept. There do seem to be some that think that the IoT world is really = all that we should care about.=20 Jim >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 >=20 > Jim Schaad wrote: > > I intend to remove the parameter which tags the ability to do > > compression of content. > > > > I do not believe that this is of interest in the IoT world. If it > > becomes necessary later for other systems it can be defined then. > > > > Jim > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > COSE mailing list > > COSE@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose > > From nobody Sat Oct 3 22:34:29 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E141F1A8AD2 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 22:34:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 jLcI0DETye8i for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 22:34:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0115.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27BAB1A8AD1 for ; Sat, 3 Oct 2015 22:34:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=oo6fbb9NuxZvxIVyK1dLLSHQJ6cThQF1tJnz4kkdGDc=; b=k7zHZ3ixXIghh5cWwQhCX/CcUvwXJkHpBbkokKjVE6zhf0KvQpMVZlzwa96+V6tMlDPT0s407ndXFiN1lxU60Va3xmsQjY7buHO8zEQOFBeVG3TRKzG0zSy7sfVlUJ7N65Uz3UuKdjvcCZqiG96NOtGIO3KvvZtj0Qrij4Xxkc8= Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.145) by BY2PR03MB441.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.142) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.280.20; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 05:34:18 +0000 Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) by BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) with mapi id 15.01.0280.021; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 05:34:17 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: Jim Schaad , 'Carsten Bormann' Thread-Topic: [COSE] Compression of content Thread-Index: AdD+O3NkZt+X1JuqTlilCzkmWPRZuQAEBGIAAABmE4AABgjToA== Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2015 05:34:16 +0000 Message-ID: References: <01c401d0fe3b$c458e4b0$4d0aae10$@augustcellars.com> <56108D66.40804@tzi.org> <01d001d0fe4d$1db5e060$5921a120$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: <01d001d0fe4d$1db5e060$5921a120$@augustcellars.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; x-originating-ip: [50.47.89.201] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR03MB441; 5:7jrt5AtPfRpVeqQmPRIehlcwQuvsMm/7rY0gAGhlWcZ0dnByr+t4Urd7qs9C4Ay8NV8EGz5fFAMe76WcRWpfcMDpFWS6iWyHVoOmMFBenyDX7zSTyrehminsU0tR4o3EdpOuSyjZVPpPRshp6+b91w==; 24:GKF0H9EqbF3npcXSQRzzF3vkskIpQf8l6JQXr+rIMmpQ2jiweYOAMV7uPSrWdzn8ceJgXmoDfMtDMYBsrThHcNBFW7E4N3RWdDZqJQyMdlg=; 20:0vwGNjn2OnS/iRHfprlC786iJFrzQERi7WqaRc+HijNC6XME4gJE9g5+GOKWrzO1K4UscdX2/hjjd/JcDrxikQ== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425024)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(61426024)(61427024); SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; x-forefront-prvs: 0719EC6A9A x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(13464003)(189002)(24454002)(377454003)(199003)(101416001)(76176999)(54356999)(50986999)(87936001)(68736005)(77096005)(76576001)(15975445007)(102836002)(77156002)(62966003)(5001770100001)(5001860100001)(5001830100001)(5007970100001)(5004730100002)(5008740100001)(106356001)(81156007)(4001540100001)(97736004)(12110500001)(92566002)(2900100001)(2950100001)(99286002)(105586002)(10400500002)(10090500001)(10290500002)(33656002)(5002640100001)(189998001)(5003600100002)(40100003)(5005710100001)(8990500004)(86362001)(5001960100002)(46102003)(575784001)(19580405001)(86612001)(19580395003)(66066001)(122556002)(74316001)(64706001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; H:BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 04 Oct 2015 05:34:16.4683 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR03MB441 Archived-At: Cc: "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Compression of content X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 05:34:28 -0000 SSBiZWxpZXZlIHRoYXQgcmVtb3ZpbmcgdGhlIGNvbXByZXNzaW9uIGNhcGFiaWxpdHkgZG9lc24n dCBwYXNzIHRoZSBjaGFpcnMnIHRlc3QgIldoYXQgV291bGQgSk9TRSBEbz8iLiAgKFNlZSBzbGlk ZSAxNCBpbiB0aGUgY2hhaXJzJyBwcmVzZW50YXRpb24gaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvcHJv Y2VlZGluZ3MvOTMvc2xpZGVzL3NsaWRlcy05My1jb3NlLTIucGRmIGFuZCB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5n IHNsaWRlcy4pDQoNCkNhcnN0ZW4ncyBwb2ludCB0aGF0IGNvbXByZXNzaW9uIGlzIGEgIm11c3Qg dW5kZXJzdGFuZCIgZmVhdHVyZSBpcyBhbHNvIGltcG9ydGFudC4gIElmIHdlIGRvbid0IGtlZXAg aXQgbm93LCB3ZSdsbCBuZXZlciBiZSBhYmxlIHRvIG9idGFpbiB0aGUgaW1wb3J0YW50ICJtdXN0 IHVuZGVyc3RhbmQiIHByb3BlcnR5IGFmdGVyIHRoZSBmYWN0Lg0KDQpJIGhhdmUgaGVhcmQgbm8g Y29tcGVsbGluZyByZWFzb24gdG8gcmVtb3ZlIGNvbXByZXNzaW9uLiAgVGhlcmVmb3JlLCB3ZSBz aG91bGQga2VlcCBpdC4NCg0KCQkJCS0tIE1pa2UNCg0KLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0t LS0NCkZyb206IENPU0UgW21haWx0bzpjb3NlLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmddIE9uIEJlaGFsZiBP ZiBKaW0gU2NoYWFkDQpTZW50OiBTYXR1cmRheSwgT2N0b2JlciAwMywgMjAxNSA3OjM0IFBNDQpU bzogJ0NhcnN0ZW4gQm9ybWFubicNCkNjOiBjb3NlQGlldGYub3JnDQpTdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogW0NP U0VdIENvbXByZXNzaW9uIG9mIGNvbnRlbnQNCg0KDQoNCj4gLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdl LS0tLS0NCj4gRnJvbTogQ2Fyc3RlbiBCb3JtYW5uIFttYWlsdG86Y2Fib0B0emkub3JnXQ0KPiBT ZW50OiBTYXR1cmRheSwgT2N0b2JlciAwMywgMjAxNSA3OjIzIFBNDQo+IFRvOiBKaW0gU2NoYWFk IDxpZXRmQGF1Z3VzdGNlbGxhcnMuY29tPg0KPiBDYzogY29zZUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBTdWJqZWN0 OiBSZTogW0NPU0VdIENvbXByZXNzaW9uIG9mIGNvbnRlbnQNCj4gDQo+IEludGVyZXN0aW5nLg0K PiANCj4gLS0gV2l0aCB0aGUgSk9TRSB2ZXJzaW9ucyBvZiB0aGVzZSBwYXJhbWV0ZXJzIGFscmVh ZHkgZGVmaW5lZCwgd2hhdCBpcyANCj4gdGhlIHByYWN0aWNhbCBlZmZlY3Qgb2Ygbm90IGhhdmlu ZyB0aGF0IHBhcmFtZXRlciBoZXJlPyAgDQo+IEltcGxlbWVudGF0aW9ucyB0aGF0IHdhbnQgaXQg YXJlIGxpa2VseSB0byBzaW1wbHkgdXNlIGl0IGFud3lheS4NCj4gKEhvd2V2ZXIsIGluIEpPU0Ug dGhpcyBpcyBhICJNVVNUIHVuZGVyc3RhbmQiIHBhcmFtZXRlciAtLSBpZiB3ZSBkb24ndCANCj4g aGF2ZSBpdCBpbml0aWFsbHksIGl0IGNhbid0IGJlIHRoYXQsIGFuZCB0aGUgdXNhZ2UgaXQgaXMg Z29pbmcgdG8gZ2V0IA0KPiBhbnl3YXkgaXMgbWF5YmUNCj4gcGVyaWxvdXMuKQ0KDQpBcmUgeW91 IGFyZ3VpbmcgdGhhdCB3ZSBzaG91bGQga2VlcCBpdD8gIEdvaW5nIGVpdGhlciB3YXkgaXMgZWFz eSwgYnV0IHB1bGxpbmcgaXQgaXMgYSBxdWlja2VyIGZpbmlzaC4NCg0KPiANCj4gLS0gTW9yZSBt ZXRhOiBBcmUgd2UgcmVhbGx5IGluIHRoZSBidXNpbmVzcyBvZiBndWVzc2luZyB3aGF0IGlzIG9m IA0KPiBpbnRlcmVzdCBpbiB0aGUgSW9UIHdvcmxkPyAgV2hlcmUgd2Ugb3B0aW1pemUgc3BlY2lm aWNhbGx5IGZvciB0aGUgSW9UIA0KPiB3b3JsZCwgd2Ugb2YgY291cnNlIGhhdmUgdG8uICBCdXQg ZG8gd2UgaGF2ZSB0byBtYWtlIGEgY29uc2Vuc3VzIA0KPiBkZWNpc2lvbiBhYm91dCB0aGF0IGZv ciBldmVyeSBzaW5nbGUgcGFyYW1ldGVyIG9mIEpPU0U/DQoNClRoaXMgaXMgd2h5IEkgYW0gYWR2 ZXJ0aXNpbmcgd2hhdCBJIHBsYW4gdG8gZG8uICBTbyB0aGF0IHBlb3BsZSBoYXZlIGEgY2hhbmNl IHRvIGdpdmUgYSBzb2xpZCBhcmd1bWVudCB0byBrZWVwIGl0IGlmIHRoZXkgdGhpbmsgaXQgc2hv dWxkIGJlIGtlcHQuICAgVGhlcmUgZG8gc2VlbSB0byBiZSBzb21lIHRoYXQgdGhpbmsgdGhhdCB0 aGUgSW9UIHdvcmxkIGlzIHJlYWxseSBhbGwgdGhhdCB3ZSBzaG91bGQgY2FyZSBhYm91dC4gDQoN CkppbQ0KDQo+IA0KPiBHcsO8w59lLCBDYXJzdGVuDQo+IA0KPiANCj4gSmltIFNjaGFhZCB3cm90 ZToNCj4gPiBJIGludGVuZCB0byByZW1vdmUgdGhlIHBhcmFtZXRlciB3aGljaCB0YWdzIHRoZSBh YmlsaXR5IHRvIGRvIA0KPiA+IGNvbXByZXNzaW9uIG9mIGNvbnRlbnQuDQo+ID4NCj4gPiBJIGRv IG5vdCBiZWxpZXZlIHRoYXQgdGhpcyBpcyBvZiBpbnRlcmVzdCBpbiB0aGUgSW9UIHdvcmxkLiAg SWYgaXQgDQo+ID4gYmVjb21lcyBuZWNlc3NhcnkgbGF0ZXIgZm9yIG90aGVyIHN5c3RlbXMgaXQg Y2FuIGJlIGRlZmluZWQgdGhlbi4NCj4gPg0KPiA+IEppbQ0KPiA+DQo+ID4NCj4gPiBfX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KPiA+IENPU0UgbWFpbGlu ZyBsaXN0DQo+ID4gQ09TRUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiA+IGh0dHBzOi8vbmEwMS5zYWZlbGlua3MucHJv dGVjdGlvbi5vdXRsb29rLmNvbS8/dXJsPWh0dHBzJTNhJTJmJTJmd3d3DQo+ID4gLmlldGYub3Jn JTJmbWFpbG1hbiUyZmxpc3RpbmZvJTJmY29zZSZkYXRhPTAxJTdjMDElN2NNaWNoYWVsLkpvbmVz JTQNCj4gPiAwbWljcm9zb2Z0LmNvbSU3YzZjOWM2MzI2ODEzNTQyOTA3ZmFmMDhkMmNjNjQ5ZTYy JTdjNzJmOTg4YmY4NmYxNDFhZg0KPiA+IDkxYWIyZDdjZDAxMWRiNDclN2MxJnNkYXRhPXBkU0pZ czVCTWVWNlllWlIlMmZjNGdBa0YweXk0U0lqaDQ5NHElMmZ5DQo+ID4gTkt5c1VZJTNkDQo+ID4N Cg0KX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCkNPU0Ug bWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQpDT1NFQGlldGYub3JnDQpodHRwczovL25hMDEuc2FmZWxpbmtzLnByb3Rl Y3Rpb24ub3V0bG9vay5jb20vP3VybD1odHRwcyUzYSUyZiUyZnd3dy5pZXRmLm9yZyUyZm1haWxt YW4lMmZsaXN0aW5mbyUyZmNvc2UlMGEmZGF0YT0wMSU3YzAxJTdjTWljaGFlbC5Kb25lcyU0MG1p Y3Jvc29mdC5jb20lN2M2YzljNjMyNjgxMzU0MjkwN2ZhZjA4ZDJjYzY0OWU2MiU3YzcyZjk4OGJm ODZmMTQxYWY5MWFiMmQ3Y2QwMTFkYjQ3JTdjMSZzZGF0YT1aVlJTcVhZTVJ5WHJTVExzVnRqWVNq UkZ0ck9HWlU0Vm4lMmZRQnp5VWNrb0UlM2QNCg== From nobody Sun Oct 4 01:46:06 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA33A1A9124 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 01:46:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 3CIL-QmtNoJM for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 01:46:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sessmg22.ericsson.net (sessmg22.ericsson.net [193.180.251.58]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 586081A911E for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 01:46:02 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb3a-f79136d0000071e2-85-5610e7481adb Received: from ESESSHC014.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sessmg22.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 72.3A.29154.847E0165; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 10:46:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ESESSMB302.ericsson.se ([169.254.2.152]) by ESESSHC014.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.60]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 10:45:59 +0200 From: =?utf-8?B?R8O2cmFuIFNlbGFuZGVy?= To: Hannes Tschofenig Thread-Topic: [COSE] Replay Protection Thread-Index: AQHQ/B8PzajSNYBVZ0mnAoCQmChMOZ5a6GmA Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2015 08:45:59 +0000 Message-ID: <3BDD6486-150D-4D9B-8C16-A920AA9806A4@ericsson.com> References: <560CE792.9080807@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <560CE792.9080807@gmx.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail-8FBE9A18-22A4-4BE7-AAFA-240C1BD702D9"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmpjkeLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42KZGfG3RtfjuUCYwcErBhbTtk5ltVi68x6r A5PH4k372TyWLPnJFMAUxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJWxt92+YJtaRevM46wNjPNUuxg5OSQETCTO 929kgrDFJC7cW8/WxcjFISRwlFHi1b19jBDOYkaJTSt62EGq2ARcJB40PALrEBEwlLg+czor iM0soCzRuOESSxcjB4ewgKrEv38cECVqEgc2P2eDsI0k9q7cBGazCKhI7L7/HayVV8Be4uCW rSwgthBQ/cyeo2A2p4C6xMwD0xhBbEag476fWsMEsUpc4taT+VBHi0g8vHiaDcIWlXj5+B8r yM3MApMZJR7PmsoCsUBQ4uTMJywTGEVmIemfhaxuFpI6iCJNif3dy6FsRYkp3Q/ZIWxriRm/ DrJB2KYSr49+ZERWs4CRYxWjaHFqcXFuupGRXmpRZnJxcX6eXl5qySZGYMQd3PLbagfjweeO hxgFOBiVeHgVOgTChFgTy4orcw8xSnOwKInzNjM9CBUSSE8sSc1OTS1ILYovKs1JLT7EyMTB KdXAuGRB3NJdEUf21WrfLdrz4M7EvF2SFmKbap98spsWxPO5aK+b4P4bS7Q1Dq7zTT/yp0Zt F6//7+kmXww/Z4Q9jsoQntoiuGpxyPXZoUcePTmt5GDE/u/G6k0XPp8+FHU38lKMdVtzgfPU 5LzbZYVp01JPz59/XZbTO2J5oeClDbwqO3kDf901+a7EUpyRaKjFXFScCABGuv39mQIAAA== Archived-At: Cc: "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Replay Protection X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 08:46:05 -0000 --Apple-Mail-8FBE9A18-22A4-4BE7-AAFA-240C1BD702D9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 DQoNCj4gT24gMSBva3QuIDIwMTUsIGF0IDA5OjU5LCBIYW5uZXMgVHNjaG9mZW5pZyA8aGFubmVz LnRzY2hvZmVuaWdAZ214Lm5ldD4gd3JvdGU6DQo+IA0KPiBIaSBhbGwsDQo+IA0KPiBjdXJyZW50 bHkgdGhlcmUgYXJlIG5vIGZpZWxkcyB0aGF0IGhlbHAgd2l0aCByZXBseSBwcm90ZWN0aW9uIGlu IHRoZQ0KPiBDT1NFIHNwZWNpZmljYXRpb24gKGFsdGhvdWdoIGluIHByYWN0aWNlIHdpdGggb3Ro ZXIgcHJvdG9jb2xzIHRoZSBub25jZQ0KPiB3aWxsIGJlIHJlLXB1cnBvc2VkIGFzIGEgc2VxdWVu Y2UgbnVtYmVyIGZpZWxkKS4NCj4gDQo+IEkgd2FzIHdvbmRlcmluZyB3aGV0aGVyIG90aGVycyBp biB0aGUgZ3JvdXAgdGhvdWdodCBpdCB3b3VsZCBiZSB1c2VmdWwNCj4gdG8gYWRkIGEgc2VxdWVu Y2UgbnVtYmVyIGFuZCBhIHRpbWVzdGFtcCBmaWVsZCB0byB0aGUgaGVhZGVyIHBhcmFtZXRlcg0K PiByZWdpc3RyeSBmb3IgdGhvc2UgYXBwbGljYXRpb25zIHRoYXQgZG8gbm90IHdhbnQgdG8gdXNl IHRoZSBleHRlcm5hbGx5DQo+IHN1cHBsaWVkIGRhdGEgY2FwYWJpbGl0eSBmb3IgcHJvdmlkaW5n IHJlcGxheSBwcm90ZWN0aW9uLg0KDQpJIHRoaW5rIHRoZXJlIHNob3VsZCBiZSBhIGNvbXBhY3Qg d2F5IG9mIHJlcHJlc2VudGluZyBhdCBsZWFzdCBzZXF1ZW5jZSBudW1iZXJzLiBDb25zaWRlcmlu ZyB0aGUgdmFyaW91cyBjYW5kaWRhdGVzIEkgd291bGQgc2F5IHRoYXQgbm9uY2VzIGFuZCB0aW1l c3RhbXAgYXJlIG9mIGxlc3MgZ2VuZXJhbCBhcHBsaWNhYmlsaXR5IGZvciB0aGUgbW9zdCBjb25z dHJhaW5lZCBzZXR0aW5ncywgd2hpY2ggaXMgd2hlcmUgdGhlIG5lZWQgZm9yIGEgdmVyeSBjb21w YWN0IG1lc3NhZ2UgbWF0dGVycy4gDQoNCkfDtnJhbg0KDQo+IA0KPiBDaWFvDQo+IEhhbm5lcw0K PiANCj4gDQo+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f DQo+IENPU0UgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+IENPU0VAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0 Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9jb3NlDQo= --Apple-Mail-8FBE9A18-22A4-4BE7-AAFA-240C1BD702D9 Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIF9jCCBfIw ggPaoAMCAQICED5j3SSNCPxYeGdCFol+BckwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwOjERMA8GA1UECgwIRXJp Y3Nzb24xJTAjBgNVBAMMHEVyaWNzc29uIE5MIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgQ0EgdjIwHhcNMTQxMjIyMDky NjE0WhcNMTcxMjIyMDkyNjEzWjBrMREwDwYDVQQKDAhFcmljc3NvbjEYMBYGA1UEAwwPR8O2cmFu IFNlbGFuZGVyMSowKAYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhtnb3Jhbi5zZWxhbmRlckBlcmljc3Nvbi5jb20xEDAO BgNVBAUTB2VyYWdvc2UwggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQCSU5mmTfwCXmA8 +o6zD0QBUzHdSI8Nnh1/IJqdUCNMsXGhyh13VB0fb/dlvGxNuFK7EKzKAmV54EVajL+FRucgxen9 lcC7bp4f1qd3au9kgOXYKzHuw9btR1xuqWG+fvzrZGaSAt2bewZenaZnyZWxoX9o7ia2ZviWktr0 frBlXciopyIlMnIgZ4D4eif47wlcX/ZPATYvm+AkdIH6/PqkY/8Cq3FMILYvrRvO5X1przyuLH+d suuETUeGbbHQrU+C2DKJnE6xVm4K9nXBvpcfkdKVQuqqg7O71Sd1QRDyt6BCXjrSZ4prRy/n26DU 6FMcIn2DkeXdWnm8SpxxoE/zAgMBAAGjggHBMIIBvTBIBgNVHR8EQTA/MD2gO6A5hjdodHRwOi8v Y3JsLnRydXN0LnRlbGlhLmNvbS9lcmljc3Nvbm5saW5kaXZpZHVhbGNhdjIuY3JsMIGCBggrBgEF BQcBAQR2MHQwKAYIKwYBBQUHMAGGHGh0dHA6Ly9vY3NwMi50cnVzdC50ZWxpYS5jb20wSAYIKwYB BQUHMAKGPGh0dHA6Ly9jYS50cnVzdC50ZWxpYXNvbmVyYS5jb20vZXJpY3Nzb25ubGluZGl2aWR1 YWxjYXYyLmNlcjAmBgNVHREEHzAdgRtnb3Jhbi5zZWxhbmRlckBlcmljc3Nvbi5jb20wVQYDVR0g BE4wTDBKBgwrBgEEAYIPAgMBARIwOjA4BggrBgEFBQcCARYsaHR0cHM6Ly9yZXBvc2l0b3J5LnRy dXN0LnRlbGlhc29uZXJhLmNvbS9DUFMwHQYDVR0lBBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwQGCCsGAQUFBwMCMB0G A1UdDgQWBBSB4nTbn3t1sB2zhLxonZW3Hhv9/zAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBSxDcrURrevhgLDL28Gyg52 cX9LNzAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCBaAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggIBANSVTbxCbSceXCp/tX+UCloB 5q5UI743Q5vKV+h+TB86caGnHBuBtHatVJTD/k+myt8+B+Iu60M2UrX3gBmwSTW6Y8MZhtXYijOM OPvKVyqHkf9ikVMWDBKG+b6O9UB+EomtcfZ7cElXCu/AjXW4Q7CZWVwPrJORLec6mfER9usYEa0O x+meWW5sRDKVHTFgVgsub3+4ouzgOQpsqGrQydYhovIptNPalWGSSTMYpW+r6rukSQ/sUjl54pCA SZj5zs9mQu9fhRtm4I+9HcBNSe1+yq6ECW0Zvc82ynYTFx3w0Art1hmmnd7euM17JzpORrh3y07D ey0wc3RoP4z4ISNffsC+z+jVMl54H1PYYiDuHiPf+cMorlMXFPs7rTFgZS/mY1B2v+qZP9O9k4i/ g4HPQlsJgnWxC5TWluMsOHzQS35FR+oei/35aDwNYvdPixeWNhUmkR4vtfydjpLW+3eKyxcf0Hf/ SVJuzMYrnssBFe+jYNGJYGvdOFjJFffqKCcRocJ0l25ALTVDtv3kpZap6YZXaBAeYTncGWVyv9te bhtILVdqlO7sLtP3zAGZ46bPTW/54F7TOwZ+kfI0vptFgJN5iAA8GwOvhBatrNw9oA9dM2ioAlBb iD3gQ8Fz7Mxq/5AkpSdt3Gzxd7HNwhi5GIkuyPtq1U7B/o19KWC7MYICljCCApICAQEwTjA6MREw DwYDVQQKDAhFcmljc3NvbjElMCMGA1UEAwwcRXJpY3Nzb24gTkwgSW5kaXZpZHVhbCBDQSB2MgIQ PmPdJI0I/Fh4Z0IWiX4FyTAJBgUrDgMCGgUAoIIBHTAYBgkqhkiG9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcB MBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0xNTEwMDQwODQ1NTlaMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJBDEWBBTp+zTRzOrvBU/d 286FwiDqMdbP+jBdBgkrBgEEAYI3EAQxUDBOMDoxETAPBgNVBAoMCEVyaWNzc29uMSUwIwYDVQQD DBxFcmljc3NvbiBOTCBJbmRpdmlkdWFsIENBIHYyAhA+Y90kjQj8WHhnQhaJfgXJMF8GCyqGSIb3 DQEJEAILMVCgTjA6MREwDwYDVQQKDAhFcmljc3NvbjElMCMGA1UEAwwcRXJpY3Nzb24gTkwgSW5k aXZpZHVhbCBDQSB2MgIQPmPdJI0I/Fh4Z0IWiX4FyTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASCAQA2WFVJUi6O qyjlrI2z9oqQLnUCa0K2yLi3ke8CqaZ/2KGB8wMJIkh9Q3cZuYapeNiCfUTLbInDW3AvUQwS/vsA 7UprMYvbmfVf5E3n60+YxuUFPhlKiB5AnGlLHmUa1FRJfKJ4Zh/y0iMRZxnz9u8ArzXLRFz6zFfB Sad34/uXLsTw7582W1CYvExzsa86T4BGwkDFRO0YHSMmLNZvMVCXsr9DovVKHjR0YZmFKwMQPQX9 +hw+2ptzNSAdWTYLjDClsjat8UZTa16llRESAHS1/+n03PffFw2wfk1aYMKeobAqvouzNXhb8LRA FKfRLSY/d/SZoVQM2CeLPXoIxq+GAAAAAAAA --Apple-Mail-8FBE9A18-22A4-4BE7-AAFA-240C1BD702D9-- From nobody Sun Oct 4 02:46:07 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20B141A6F82 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 02:46:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no 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 N0lUIvz-RfAL for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 02:46:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 74DD81A6F41 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 02:46:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::b]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t949jweD022861; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 11:45:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nar.local (p5DC7F6AE.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.199.246.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nTKts6XN9z4ppv; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 11:45:57 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5610F554.5000506@tzi.org> Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 11:45:56 +0200 From: Carsten Bormann User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.5 (Macintosh/20150923) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jim Schaad References: <01c401d0fe3b$c458e4b0$4d0aae10$@augustcellars.com> <56108D66.40804@tzi.org> <01d001d0fe4d$1db5e060$5921a120$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: <01d001d0fe4d$1db5e060$5921a120$@augustcellars.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Compression of content X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 09:46:05 -0000 > Are you arguing that we should keep it? Going either way is easy, but pulling it is a quicker finish. Not really *arguing* for keeping it right now. I'm focusing on understanding how we can keep COSE modular. So if this is something that could be put into a "module" that specific COSE applications don't have to require, I'd be happy. I'd like to understand the "MUST understand" requirement from JOSE a bit better. >> > -- More meta: Are we really in the business of guessing what is of interest in the >> > IoT world? Where we optimize specifically for the IoT world, we of course have >> > to. But do we have to make a consensus decision about that for every single >> > parameter of JOSE? > > This is why I am advertising what I plan to do. So that people have a chance to give a solid argument to keep it if they think it should be kept. There do seem to be some that think that the IoT world is really all that we should care about. The IoT world is big, and, as Hannes keeps reminding us, also includes quite capable devices alongside the basic microcontrollers RFC 7228 is addressing. Also, from the other end, compression techniques are getting better -- most people probably think about the overhead of DEFLATE, while there are now much more frugal schemes such as LZ4 in wide deployment. So while compression is still nothing that would help much for class 1 devices, there is a continuum upwards where compression may enter the IoT picture at some point for some applications. Grüße, Carsten From nobody Sun Oct 4 02:49:28 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 362961A6FDD for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 02:49:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no 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 4HWVRJSs3nMU for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 02:49:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 424821A6FD2 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 02:49:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.201.11]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t949nLbD029772; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 11:49:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nar.local (p5DC7F6AE.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.199.246.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nTKyn5JMtz4q19; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 11:49:21 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5610F620.9080808@tzi.org> Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 11:49:20 +0200 From: Carsten Bormann User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.5 (Macintosh/20150923) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jim Schaad References: <01c501d0fe42$fe257a30$fa706e90$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: <01c501d0fe42$fe257a30$fa706e90$@augustcellars.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] The use of RSA algorithms X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 09:49:28 -0000 Jim Schaad wrote: > I am intending to remove all RSA algorithms from the document. It does not > seem that this is going to be used by the IoT world due to size. It does > mean that the only signature algorithms left are going to be EC algorithms > which might be an IPR issue but RFC 6090 hopefully addresses that problem. > > I will be starting a local document on GitHub which will keep the RSA text > for either restoration if needed or for a new document. That could be an example for one of the "modules" I talked about in the previous message. Grüße, Carsten From nobody Sun Oct 4 03:40:21 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB9B71ACCEE for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 03:40:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 luAFrzrW2SW4 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 03:40:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from emh04.mail.saunalahti.fi (emh04.mail.saunalahti.fi [62.142.5.110]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFABC1ACCEB for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 03:40:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from LK-Perkele-VII (a91-155-194-207.elisa-laajakaista.fi [91.155.194.207]) by emh04.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67ADD1A25F5; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 13:40:15 +0300 (EEST) Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2015 13:40:15 +0300 From: Ilari Liusvaara To: Carsten Bormann Message-ID: <20151004104015.GA3440@LK-Perkele-VII> References: <01c401d0fe3b$c458e4b0$4d0aae10$@augustcellars.com> <56108D66.40804@tzi.org> <01d001d0fe4d$1db5e060$5921a120$@augustcellars.com> <5610F554.5000506@tzi.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5610F554.5000506@tzi.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: Ilari Liusvaara Archived-At: Cc: Jim Schaad , cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Compression of content X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 10:40:20 -0000 On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 11:45:56AM +0200, Carsten Bormann wrote: > > Are you arguing that we should keep it? Going either way is easy, but pulling it is a quicker finish. > > Not really *arguing* for keeping it right now. I'm focusing on > understanding how we can keep COSE modular. So if this is something > that could be put into a "module" that specific COSE applications don't > have to require, I'd be happy. I'd like to understand the "MUST > understand" requirement from JOSE a bit better. Maybe dumb question, but: Have compressed messages contain "crit" header (0x02 in the current spec) refencing "zip" header (with numeric value assigned if needed). Why won't that work? Crit header apparently has intended purpose of designating various nonstandard header fields to be important for interpretting the message. -Ilari From nobody Sun Oct 4 10:28:04 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E516A1B2AF9 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 10:28:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 2TtJdvnSm-wa for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 10:28:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp4.pacifier.net (smtp4.pacifier.net [64.255.237.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 149821B2AF8 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 10:28:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (winery.augustcellars.com [206.212.239.129]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp4.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8210038EEE; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 10:27:59 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: "'Mike Jones'" , "'Carsten Bormann'" References: <01c401d0fe3b$c458e4b0$4d0aae10$@augustcellars.com> <56108D66.40804@tzi.org> <01d001d0fe4d$1db5e060$5921a120$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2015 10:25:27 -0700 Message-ID: <01f601d0fec9$a9cb9f00$fd62dd00$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQGLSi46CvNF2pX8+9Owndt0tLSnDwGMTUDoAvdVRB8BcmQUXp63Tl2w Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Compression of content X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 17:28:02 -0000 We are not making any statements about must understand in the COSE = documents. We are providing features that application profiles are = going to be able to say it must be understood, or it must be ignored. I = don't buy that as an argument about saying that it needs to be included = now. Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Jones [mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com] > Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2015 10:34 PM > To: Jim Schaad ; 'Carsten Bormann' = > Cc: cose@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [COSE] Compression of content >=20 > I believe that removing the compression capability doesn't pass the = chairs' test > "What Would JOSE Do?". (See slide 14 in the chairs' presentation > https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-cose-2.pdf and = the > following slides.) >=20 > Carsten's point that compression is a "must understand" feature is = also > important. If we don't keep it now, we'll never be able to obtain the = important > "must understand" property after the fact. >=20 > I have heard no compelling reason to remove compression. Therefore, = we > should keep it. >=20 > -- Mike >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: COSE [mailto:cose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jim Schaad > Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2015 7:34 PM > To: 'Carsten Bormann' > Cc: cose@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [COSE] Compression of content >=20 >=20 >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Carsten Bormann [mailto:cabo@tzi.org] > > Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2015 7:23 PM > > To: Jim Schaad > > Cc: cose@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [COSE] Compression of content > > > > Interesting. > > > > -- With the JOSE versions of these parameters already defined, what = is > > the practical effect of not having that parameter here? > > Implementations that want it are likely to simply use it anwyay. > > (However, in JOSE this is a "MUST understand" parameter -- if we = don't > > have it initially, it can't be that, and the usage it is going to = get > > anyway is maybe > > perilous.) >=20 > Are you arguing that we should keep it? Going either way is easy, but = pulling it is > a quicker finish. >=20 > > > > -- More meta: Are we really in the business of guessing what is of > > interest in the IoT world? Where we optimize specifically for the = IoT > > world, we of course have to. But do we have to make a consensus > > decision about that for every single parameter of JOSE? >=20 > This is why I am advertising what I plan to do. So that people have a = chance to > give a solid argument to keep it if they think it should be kept. = There do seem to > be some that think that the IoT world is really all that we should = care about. >=20 > Jim >=20 > > > > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > > > > > > Jim Schaad wrote: > > > I intend to remove the parameter which tags the ability to do > > > compression of content. > > > > > > I do not believe that this is of interest in the IoT world. If it > > > becomes necessary later for other systems it can be defined then. > > > > > > Jim > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > COSE mailing list > > > COSE@ietf.org > > > = https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3a%2f%2fwww > > > > .ietf.org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fcose&data=3D01%7c01%7cMichael.Jones%4 > > > > 0microsoft.com%7c6c9c6326813542907faf08d2cc649e62%7c72f988bf86f141af > > > > 91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=3DpdSJYs5BMeV6YeZR%2fc4gAkF0yy4SIjh494q%2 > fy > > > NKysUY%3d > > > >=20 > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > = https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3a%2f%2fwww.ie= tf. > org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fcose%0a&data=3D01%7c01%7cMichael.Jones%40m > icrosoft.com%7c6c9c6326813542907faf08d2cc649e62%7c72f988bf86f141af91 > ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=3DZVRSqXYMRyXrSTLsVtjYSjRFtrOGZU4Vn%2fQBzyU > ckoE%3d From nobody Sun Oct 4 10:58:25 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F6131B3419 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 10:58:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 QMJsZiH0UapK for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 10:58:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0759.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:759]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70C6A1B341B for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 10:58:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=/LzCC9HCcsFn7mm1NXvn7yzp3XdY1FbjEIfeSgXqeyE=; b=JAAkRqjTQvWOXYZD2c//jWyjxpenLNCYvFIKoFOfY/q3EWgdu4UnKQBASZG9CZIjcHapK1gj7/kfJUSJIhWT+r9+QfHFiB1EI+gY5XHVmDkFJiKbcM5lUQ8J1SAsW2VKxJroXEgGU3J05HAqCQS5oFrOe/m9a9vyEypqY1baQEY= Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.145) by BY2PR03MB441.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.142) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.280.20; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 17:57:59 +0000 Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) by BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) with mapi id 15.01.0280.021; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 17:57:57 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: Jim Schaad , 'Carsten Bormann' Thread-Topic: [COSE] Compression of content Thread-Index: AdD+O3NkZt+X1JuqTlilCzkmWPRZuQAEBGIAAABmE4AABgjToAAZGhuAAAD/JcA= Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2015 17:57:57 +0000 Message-ID: References: <01c401d0fe3b$c458e4b0$4d0aae10$@augustcellars.com> <56108D66.40804@tzi.org> <01d001d0fe4d$1db5e060$5921a120$@augustcellars.com> <01f601d0fec9$a9cb9f00$fd62dd00$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: <01f601d0fec9$a9cb9f00$fd62dd00$@augustcellars.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; x-originating-ip: [50.47.89.201] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR03MB441; 5:BXCy0w9ZVlxqTd+0hIBG0EEgXQ0f9NCbHkoY3e5K/PdwLgVY9PnbxKEZfQGnrcBIZCsWZD5m3SaEiG7VgoY8KCOa2DS1kcyIQWpX/jzLsPKzknNq+nbF+QjQIO5Wth2YeIjVwPS+gSWObHKQ9GIgdg==; 24:atdCiKVZmCDgiTniq/ZSkl4+4D6B78/7E+ALMgphgstm5D+1HQss/runjBlvgcSa3Dfmi4rFMR7iHfrp5D+MHBAAswXNrvpxzIFoh9L4B5M=; 20:KVCCJo7BaqHoeY0Svn1XqxlN6XA95jrTxj6dXpwT3enMP1rfCUCau5FxD8BOSTMnGhho51eJUO15y/m5V/SR3Q== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(108003899814671); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425024)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(61426024)(61427024); SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; x-forefront-prvs: 0719EC6A9A x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(199003)(189002)(13464003)(24454002)(189998001)(5002640100001)(8990500004)(5003600100002)(5005710100001)(10090500001)(40100003)(10400500002)(10290500002)(33656002)(74316001)(64706001)(93886004)(575784001)(5001960100002)(86612001)(122556002)(86362001)(19580395003)(66066001)(46102003)(19580405001)(15975445007)(102836002)(76576001)(68736005)(77096005)(50986999)(77156002)(62966003)(101416001)(87936001)(76176999)(54356999)(2950100001)(5001770100001)(105586002)(5001860100001)(5001830100001)(99286002)(4001540100001)(81156007)(92566002)(97736004)(5007970100001)(5004730100002)(106356001)(5008740100001)(2900100001)(12110500001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; H:BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 04 Oct 2015 17:57:57.3261 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR03MB441 Archived-At: Cc: "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Compression of content X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 17:58:23 -0000 VGhhdCdzIGNlcnRhaW5seSBub3QgdHJ1ZS4gIEZvciBpbnN0YW5jZSwgSSdtIHN1cmUgd2UncmUg bWFraW5nIGEgc3RhdGVtZW50IHRoYXQgdGhlIGFsZ29yaXRobSBoZWFkZXIgcGFyYW1ldGVyIG11 c3QgYmUgdW5kZXJzdG9vZCAod2hldGhlciBpdCdzIHdvcmRlZCB0aGF0IHdheSBvciBub3QpLg0K DQpZb3UgZGlkbid0IGFuc3dlciBteSBtYWluIHBvaW50LCB3aGljaCBpcyB0aGF0IHRoZXJlIG5l ZWRzIHRvIGJlIGEgY29tcGVsbGluZyBjYXNlIHN0YXRlZCB0byByZW1vdmUgaXQgaWYgd2UncmUg Z29pbmcgdG8gZG8gc28gYW5kIHRoZSB3b3JraW5nIGdyb3VwIG5lZWRzIHRvIGFncmVlIHdpdGgg dGhhdCBjYXNlIC0gc29tZXRoaW5nIHRoYXQgaGFzbid0IGhhcHBlbmVkLiAgT3RoZXJ3aXNlLCBn aXZlbiBpdCdzIGltcG9ydGFudCBmdW5jdGlvbmFsaXR5LCBvdXIgZGVmYXVsdCBkZWNpc2lvbiBz aG91bGQgYmUgdG8gcmV0YWluIGl0Lg0KDQoJCQkJLS0gTWlrZQ0KDQotLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1l c3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KRnJvbTogSmltIFNjaGFhZCBbbWFpbHRvOmlldGZAYXVndXN0Y2VsbGFycy5j b21dIA0KU2VudDogU3VuZGF5LCBPY3RvYmVyIDA0LCAyMDE1IDEwOjI1IEFNDQpUbzogTWlrZSBK b25lczsgJ0NhcnN0ZW4gQm9ybWFubicNCkNjOiBjb3NlQGlldGYub3JnDQpTdWJqZWN0OiBSRTog W0NPU0VdIENvbXByZXNzaW9uIG9mIGNvbnRlbnQNCg0KV2UgYXJlIG5vdCBtYWtpbmcgYW55IHN0 YXRlbWVudHMgYWJvdXQgbXVzdCB1bmRlcnN0YW5kIGluIHRoZSBDT1NFIGRvY3VtZW50cy4gIFdl IGFyZSBwcm92aWRpbmcgZmVhdHVyZXMgdGhhdCBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbiBwcm9maWxlcyBhcmUgZ29p bmcgdG8gYmUgYWJsZSB0byBzYXkgaXQgbXVzdCBiZSB1bmRlcnN0b29kLCBvciBpdCBtdXN0IGJl IGlnbm9yZWQuICBJIGRvbid0IGJ1eSB0aGF0IGFzIGFuIGFyZ3VtZW50IGFib3V0IHNheWluZyB0 aGF0IGl0IG5lZWRzIHRvIGJlIGluY2x1ZGVkIG5vdy4NCg0KSmltDQoNCj4gLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5h bCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj4gRnJvbTogTWlrZSBKb25lcyBbbWFpbHRvOk1pY2hhZWwuSm9uZXNA bWljcm9zb2Z0LmNvbV0NCj4gU2VudDogU2F0dXJkYXksIE9jdG9iZXIgMDMsIDIwMTUgMTA6MzQg UE0NCj4gVG86IEppbSBTY2hhYWQgPGlldGZAYXVndXN0Y2VsbGFycy5jb20+OyAnQ2Fyc3RlbiBC b3JtYW5uJyANCj4gPGNhYm9AdHppLm9yZz4NCj4gQ2M6IGNvc2VAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gU3ViamVj dDogUkU6IFtDT1NFXSBDb21wcmVzc2lvbiBvZiBjb250ZW50DQo+IA0KPiBJIGJlbGlldmUgdGhh dCByZW1vdmluZyB0aGUgY29tcHJlc3Npb24gY2FwYWJpbGl0eSBkb2Vzbid0IHBhc3MgdGhlIA0K PiBjaGFpcnMnIHRlc3QgIldoYXQgV291bGQgSk9TRSBEbz8iLiAgKFNlZSBzbGlkZSAxNCBpbiB0 aGUgY2hhaXJzJyANCj4gcHJlc2VudGF0aW9uIA0KPiBodHRwczovL25hMDEuc2FmZWxpbmtzLnBy b3RlY3Rpb24ub3V0bG9vay5jb20vP3VybD1odHRwcyUzYSUyZiUyZnd3dy5pDQo+IGV0Zi5vcmcl MmZwcm9jZWVkaW5ncyUyZjkzJTJmc2xpZGVzJTJmc2xpZGVzLTkzLWNvc2UtMi5wZGYmZGF0YT0w MSU3YzANCj4gMSU3Y01pY2hhZWwuSm9uZXMlNDBtaWNyb3NvZnQuY29tJTdjY2FlOThhMTA1NTM0 NDhjN2E0ZjIwOGQyY2NlMTI3MmElNw0KPiBjNzJmOTg4YmY4NmYxNDFhZjkxYWIyZDdjZDAxMWRi NDclN2MxJnNkYXRhPWExWDkxUTJHa2JoQjIzdmhyaVhJczJKWTJWDQo+IGlTenZZdVA0OUF0OUVZ Y1RrJTNkIGFuZCB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIHNsaWRlcy4pDQo+IA0KPiBDYXJzdGVuJ3MgcG9pbnQg dGhhdCBjb21wcmVzc2lvbiBpcyBhICJtdXN0IHVuZGVyc3RhbmQiIGZlYXR1cmUgaXMgDQo+IGFs c28gaW1wb3J0YW50LiAgSWYgd2UgZG9uJ3Qga2VlcCBpdCBub3csIHdlJ2xsIG5ldmVyIGJlIGFi bGUgdG8gDQo+IG9idGFpbiB0aGUgaW1wb3J0YW50ICJtdXN0IHVuZGVyc3RhbmQiIHByb3BlcnR5 IGFmdGVyIHRoZSBmYWN0Lg0KPiANCj4gSSBoYXZlIGhlYXJkIG5vIGNvbXBlbGxpbmcgcmVhc29u IHRvIHJlbW92ZSBjb21wcmVzc2lvbi4gIFRoZXJlZm9yZSwgDQo+IHdlIHNob3VsZCBrZWVwIGl0 Lg0KPiANCj4gCQkJCS0tIE1pa2UNCj4gDQo+IC0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQo+ IEZyb206IENPU0UgW21haWx0bzpjb3NlLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmddIE9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZiBK aW0gU2NoYWFkDQo+IFNlbnQ6IFNhdHVyZGF5LCBPY3RvYmVyIDAzLCAyMDE1IDc6MzQgUE0NCj4g VG86ICdDYXJzdGVuIEJvcm1hbm4nDQo+IENjOiBjb3NlQGlldGYub3JnDQo+IFN1YmplY3Q6IFJl OiBbQ09TRV0gQ29tcHJlc3Npb24gb2YgY29udGVudA0KPiANCj4gDQo+IA0KPiA+IC0tLS0tT3Jp Z2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQo+ID4gRnJvbTogQ2Fyc3RlbiBCb3JtYW5uIFttYWlsdG86Y2Fi b0B0emkub3JnXQ0KPiA+IFNlbnQ6IFNhdHVyZGF5LCBPY3RvYmVyIDAzLCAyMDE1IDc6MjMgUE0N Cj4gPiBUbzogSmltIFNjaGFhZCA8aWV0ZkBhdWd1c3RjZWxsYXJzLmNvbT4NCj4gPiBDYzogY29z ZUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiA+IFN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbQ09TRV0gQ29tcHJlc3Npb24gb2YgY29udGVu dA0KPiA+DQo+ID4gSW50ZXJlc3RpbmcuDQo+ID4NCj4gPiAtLSBXaXRoIHRoZSBKT1NFIHZlcnNp b25zIG9mIHRoZXNlIHBhcmFtZXRlcnMgYWxyZWFkeSBkZWZpbmVkLCB3aGF0IA0KPiA+IGlzIHRo ZSBwcmFjdGljYWwgZWZmZWN0IG9mIG5vdCBoYXZpbmcgdGhhdCBwYXJhbWV0ZXIgaGVyZT8NCj4g PiBJbXBsZW1lbnRhdGlvbnMgdGhhdCB3YW50IGl0IGFyZSBsaWtlbHkgdG8gc2ltcGx5IHVzZSBp dCBhbnd5YXkuDQo+ID4gKEhvd2V2ZXIsIGluIEpPU0UgdGhpcyBpcyBhICJNVVNUIHVuZGVyc3Rh bmQiIHBhcmFtZXRlciAtLSBpZiB3ZSANCj4gPiBkb24ndCBoYXZlIGl0IGluaXRpYWxseSwgaXQg Y2FuJ3QgYmUgdGhhdCwgYW5kIHRoZSB1c2FnZSBpdCBpcyBnb2luZyANCj4gPiB0byBnZXQgYW55 d2F5IGlzIG1heWJlDQo+ID4gcGVyaWxvdXMuKQ0KPiANCj4gQXJlIHlvdSBhcmd1aW5nIHRoYXQg d2Ugc2hvdWxkIGtlZXAgaXQ/ICBHb2luZyBlaXRoZXIgd2F5IGlzIGVhc3ksIGJ1dCANCj4gcHVs bGluZyBpdCBpcyBhIHF1aWNrZXIgZmluaXNoLg0KPiANCj4gPg0KPiA+IC0tIE1vcmUgbWV0YTog QXJlIHdlIHJlYWxseSBpbiB0aGUgYnVzaW5lc3Mgb2YgZ3Vlc3Npbmcgd2hhdCBpcyBvZiANCj4g PiBpbnRlcmVzdCBpbiB0aGUgSW9UIHdvcmxkPyAgV2hlcmUgd2Ugb3B0aW1pemUgc3BlY2lmaWNh bGx5IGZvciB0aGUgDQo+ID4gSW9UIHdvcmxkLCB3ZSBvZiBjb3Vyc2UgaGF2ZSB0by4gIEJ1dCBk byB3ZSBoYXZlIHRvIG1ha2UgYSBjb25zZW5zdXMgDQo+ID4gZGVjaXNpb24gYWJvdXQgdGhhdCBm b3IgZXZlcnkgc2luZ2xlIHBhcmFtZXRlciBvZiBKT1NFPw0KPiANCj4gVGhpcyBpcyB3aHkgSSBh bSBhZHZlcnRpc2luZyB3aGF0IEkgcGxhbiB0byBkby4gIFNvIHRoYXQgcGVvcGxlIGhhdmUgYSBj aGFuY2UgdG8NCj4gZ2l2ZSBhIHNvbGlkIGFyZ3VtZW50IHRvIGtlZXAgaXQgaWYgdGhleSB0aGlu ayBpdCBzaG91bGQgYmUga2VwdC4gICBUaGVyZSBkbyBzZWVtIHRvDQo+IGJlIHNvbWUgdGhhdCB0 aGluayB0aGF0IHRoZSBJb1Qgd29ybGQgaXMgcmVhbGx5IGFsbCB0aGF0IHdlIHNob3VsZCBjYXJl IGFib3V0Lg0KPiANCj4gSmltDQo+IA0KPiA+DQo+ID4gR3LDvMOfZSwgQ2Fyc3Rlbg0KPiA+DQo+ ID4NCj4gPiBKaW0gU2NoYWFkIHdyb3RlOg0KPiA+ID4gSSBpbnRlbmQgdG8gcmVtb3ZlIHRoZSBw YXJhbWV0ZXIgd2hpY2ggdGFncyB0aGUgYWJpbGl0eSB0byBkbyANCj4gPiA+IGNvbXByZXNzaW9u IG9mIGNvbnRlbnQuDQo+ID4gPg0KPiA+ID4gSSBkbyBub3QgYmVsaWV2ZSB0aGF0IHRoaXMgaXMg b2YgaW50ZXJlc3QgaW4gdGhlIElvVCB3b3JsZC4gIElmIGl0IA0KPiA+ID4gYmVjb21lcyBuZWNl c3NhcnkgbGF0ZXIgZm9yIG90aGVyIHN5c3RlbXMgaXQgY2FuIGJlIGRlZmluZWQgdGhlbi4NCj4g PiA+DQo+ID4gPiBKaW0NCj4gPiA+DQo+ID4gPg0KPiA+ID4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4gPiA+IENPU0UgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+ID4g PiBDT1NFQGlldGYub3JnDQo+ID4gPiBodHRwczovL25hMDEuc2FmZWxpbmtzLnByb3RlY3Rpb24u b3V0bG9vay5jb20vP3VybD1odHRwcyUzYSUyZiUyZncNCj4gPiA+IHd3DQo+ID4gPg0KPiAuaWV0 Zi5vcmclMmZtYWlsbWFuJTJmbGlzdGluZm8lMmZjb3NlJmRhdGE9MDElN2MwMSU3Y01pY2hhZWwu Sm9uZXMlNA0KPiA+ID4NCj4gMG1pY3Jvc29mdC5jb20lN2M2YzljNjMyNjgxMzU0MjkwN2ZhZjA4 ZDJjYzY0OWU2MiU3YzcyZjk4OGJmODZmMTQxYWYNCj4gPiA+DQo+IDkxYWIyZDdjZDAxMWRiNDcl N2MxJnNkYXRhPXBkU0pZczVCTWVWNlllWlIlMmZjNGdBa0YweXk0U0lqaDQ5NHElMg0KPiBmeQ0K PiA+ID4gTkt5c1VZJTNkDQo+ID4gPg0KPiANCj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4gQ09TRSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj4gQ09TRUBpZXRmLm9y Zw0KPiBodHRwczovL25hMDEuc2FmZWxpbmtzLnByb3RlY3Rpb24ub3V0bG9vay5jb20vP3VybD1o dHRwcyUzYSUyZiUyZnd3dy5pZXRmLg0KPiBvcmclMmZtYWlsbWFuJTJmbGlzdGluZm8lMmZjb3Nl JTBhJmRhdGE9MDElN2MwMSU3Y01pY2hhZWwuSm9uZXMlNDBtDQo+IGljcm9zb2Z0LmNvbSU3YzZj OWM2MzI2ODEzNTQyOTA3ZmFmMDhkMmNjNjQ5ZTYyJTdjNzJmOTg4YmY4NmYxNDFhZjkxDQo+IGFi MmQ3Y2QwMTFkYjQ3JTdjMSZzZGF0YT1aVlJTcVhZTVJ5WHJTVExzVnRqWVNqUkZ0ck9HWlU0Vm4l MmZRQnp5VQ0KPiBja29FJTNkDQoNCg== From nobody Sun Oct 4 11:13:17 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1746A1B2DD3 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 11:13:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.492 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.492 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no 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 ODUk312dl0yk for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 11:13:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0113.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.113]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 29FC61B344E for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 11:13:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=vp8KVL+gLwnxLF8y1wXnCWc0ECbjiyFBVZF1ORLfGME=; b=HeKqtpjQnIFQLA3rrC1Sh7iE2jjkZZLGlwKviBKCOmLeQJxYB8IvNlj51M6iDVJk3B7hSnENixjjX34Mg3Bvzv9Ft1iK3F39NXMBEPjsu/lDbpgkF8faNOaaJU62J/jMdVwxY3ZlHJmjhbZ7Eop3cv23GfHseYpM2FrmRyzVFyU= Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.145) by BY2PR03MB441.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.142) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.280.20; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 18:13:08 +0000 Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) by BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) with mapi id 15.01.0280.021; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 18:13:08 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: =?utf-8?B?R8O2cmFuIFNlbGFuZGVy?= , "Hannes Tschofenig" Thread-Topic: [COSE] Replay Protection Thread-Index: AQHQ/B8PgiYNpaFjIEKaMX3I9UoxFJ5bCfCAgACccQA= Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2015 18:13:07 +0000 Message-ID: References: <560CE792.9080807@gmx.net> <3BDD6486-150D-4D9B-8C16-A920AA9806A4@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: <3BDD6486-150D-4D9B-8C16-A920AA9806A4@ericsson.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; x-originating-ip: [50.47.89.201] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR03MB441; 5:E+eE6TwGx8alrzBj2xmHXZ0jV5ca1AjE8H9maQUEc9QCZ0cj334lp70gwjnZP1H+bQ1AzjHK//FShwxPV2mEjqoQ0uvpsSqWJN/YnT5UIdGeaN3FBTdULj+agZYj5Di5QvlpUkt22hgmfFczQvcy+Q==; 24:eH01AZ4q5auPnLgGhjDgzr8x7ij68DA9jMoqn7ZqyCwKMgF5bAPS5Lqyn5pB6ZwsUrIdxfSro93dx44yitF3cSWIUMRFVUFyWUiVqXF1p44=; 20:AT7cHHRJos3kVLZQWNO9hdSsdByCvm6vhHNKOa+gEVOegXdHNCZ1XhPIQx90ezelJG1x2TWUaUz6e/cwNTPtbw== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425024)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(61426024)(61427024); SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; x-forefront-prvs: 0719EC6A9A x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(53754006)(377454003)(199003)(189002)(13464003)(24454002)(51444003)(5002640100001)(189998001)(8990500004)(5003600100002)(5005710100001)(10090500001)(40100003)(10400500002)(10290500002)(33656002)(64706001)(74316001)(5001960100002)(86612001)(122556002)(86362001)(66066001)(46102003)(19580395003)(19580405001)(102836002)(15975445007)(76576001)(68736005)(77096005)(50986999)(77156002)(62966003)(101416001)(87936001)(54356999)(76176999)(2950100001)(5001770100001)(106116001)(105586002)(5001860100001)(5001830100001)(99286002)(92566002)(81156007)(4001540100001)(97736004)(5007970100001)(5004730100002)(5008740100001)(106356001)(11100500001)(2900100001)(12110500001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; H:BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 04 Oct 2015 18:13:07.4345 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR03MB441 Archived-At: Cc: "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Replay Protection X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2015 18:13:16 -0000 VGhlIGZhY3QgdGhhdCB3ZSdyZSBldmVuIGhhdmluZyBhIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gYWJvdXQgd2hhdCB0 aGUgYmVzdCBjb250ZW50IGZvciB0aGUgc2VxdWVuY2UgbnVtYmVyL3RpbWVzdGFtcCBpcyBtZWFu cyB0aGF0IHRoZXJlIGFyZSBtdWx0aXBsZSBnb29kIGNob2ljZXMgYW5kIHRoYXQgYXBwbGljYXRp b25zIHdpbGwgd2FudCB0byB1c2UgdGhlIGNob2ljZSBhcHByb3ByaWF0ZSB0byB0aGUgYXBwbGlj YXRpb24ncyBuZWVkcy4gIFRoYXQncyB3aHkgdGhpcyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBzaG91bGQgYmUgcGFy dCBvZiB0aGUgYXBwbGljYXRpb24gcGF5bG9hZCAtIG5vdCBwYXJ0IG9mIHRoZSBjcnlwdG9ncmFw aGljIHdyYXBwZXIuDQoNCkkgdGhpbmsgcGFydCBvZiB3aHkgdGhpcyBpcyBjb21pbmcgdXAgaXMg dGhhdCB3ZSBkb24ndCBoYXZlIGEgQ0JPUiBzcGVjIGZvciBkZWZpbmluZyBzdGFuZGFyZCBhcHBs aWNhdGlvbiBwYXlsb2FkIGNvbnRlbnQgZWxlbWVudHMgbGlrZSB3ZSBkaWQgZm9yIEpPU0UuICBG b3IgSk9TRSwgdGhlIGNyeXB0b2dyYXBoaWMgY29udGVudCBpcyBkZWZpbmVkIGluIEpXUywgSldF LCBKV0ssIGFuZCBKV0EgW1JGQ3MgNzUxNS03NTE4XS4gIFdoZXJlYXMsIHN0YW5kYXJkIGFwcGxp Y2F0aW9uIGNvbnRlbnQgYXBwcm9wcmlhdGUgZm9yIHNvbWUgY29udGV4dHMgd2FzIGRlZmluZWQg YnkgdGhlIEpTT04gV2ViIFRva2VuIHNwZWMgW1JGQyA3NTE5XS4gIFRoZXJlIGlzbid0IGFuIGVx dWl2YWxlbnQgdG8gSldUIGZvciBDQk9SIGF0IHByZXNlbnQuICBJIHRoaW5rIHRoYXQncyBiZWhp bmQgcGFydCBvZiB0aGUgdXJnZSB0byBqYW0gdGhpbmdzIGludG8gdGhlIENPU0UgaGVhZGVycyAt IHNpbmNlIHdlIGhhdmVuJ3QgZGVmaW5lZCBhIHJpZ2h0IHBsYWNlIHRvIHB1dCB0aGVtIGluIHRo ZSBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbiBwYXlsb2FkLg0KDQoJCQkJTXkgMsKiIHdvcnRo4oCmDQoJCQkJLS0gTWlr ZQ0KDQotLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KRnJvbTogQ09TRSBbbWFpbHRvOmNvc2Ut Ym91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZ10gT24gQmVoYWxmIE9mIEfDtnJhbiBTZWxhbmRlcg0KU2VudDogU3Vu ZGF5LCBPY3RvYmVyIDA0LCAyMDE1IDE6NDYgQU0NClRvOiBIYW5uZXMgVHNjaG9mZW5pZw0KQ2M6 IGNvc2VAaWV0Zi5vcmcNClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbQ09TRV0gUmVwbGF5IFByb3RlY3Rpb24NCg0K DQoNCj4gT24gMSBva3QuIDIwMTUsIGF0IDA5OjU5LCBIYW5uZXMgVHNjaG9mZW5pZyA8aGFubmVz LnRzY2hvZmVuaWdAZ214Lm5ldD4gd3JvdGU6DQo+IA0KPiBIaSBhbGwsDQo+IA0KPiBjdXJyZW50 bHkgdGhlcmUgYXJlIG5vIGZpZWxkcyB0aGF0IGhlbHAgd2l0aCByZXBseSBwcm90ZWN0aW9uIGlu IHRoZSANCj4gQ09TRSBzcGVjaWZpY2F0aW9uIChhbHRob3VnaCBpbiBwcmFjdGljZSB3aXRoIG90 aGVyIHByb3RvY29scyB0aGUgDQo+IG5vbmNlIHdpbGwgYmUgcmUtcHVycG9zZWQgYXMgYSBzZXF1 ZW5jZSBudW1iZXIgZmllbGQpLg0KPiANCj4gSSB3YXMgd29uZGVyaW5nIHdoZXRoZXIgb3RoZXJz IGluIHRoZSBncm91cCB0aG91Z2h0IGl0IHdvdWxkIGJlIHVzZWZ1bCANCj4gdG8gYWRkIGEgc2Vx dWVuY2UgbnVtYmVyIGFuZCBhIHRpbWVzdGFtcCBmaWVsZCB0byB0aGUgaGVhZGVyIHBhcmFtZXRl ciANCj4gcmVnaXN0cnkgZm9yIHRob3NlIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9ucyB0aGF0IGRvIG5vdCB3YW50IHRv IHVzZSB0aGUgZXh0ZXJuYWxseSANCj4gc3VwcGxpZWQgZGF0YSBjYXBhYmlsaXR5IGZvciBwcm92 aWRpbmcgcmVwbGF5IHByb3RlY3Rpb24uDQoNCkkgdGhpbmsgdGhlcmUgc2hvdWxkIGJlIGEgY29t cGFjdCB3YXkgb2YgcmVwcmVzZW50aW5nIGF0IGxlYXN0IHNlcXVlbmNlIG51bWJlcnMuIENvbnNp ZGVyaW5nIHRoZSB2YXJpb3VzIGNhbmRpZGF0ZXMgSSB3b3VsZCBzYXkgdGhhdCBub25jZXMgYW5k IHRpbWVzdGFtcCBhcmUgb2YgbGVzcyBnZW5lcmFsIGFwcGxpY2FiaWxpdHkgZm9yIHRoZSBtb3N0 IGNvbnN0cmFpbmVkIHNldHRpbmdzLCB3aGljaCBpcyB3aGVyZSB0aGUgbmVlZCBmb3IgYSB2ZXJ5 IGNvbXBhY3QgbWVzc2FnZSBtYXR0ZXJzLiANCg0KR8O2cmFuDQoNCj4gDQo+IENpYW8NCj4gSGFu bmVzDQo+IA0KPiANCj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX18NCj4gQ09TRSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj4gQ09TRUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBodHRwczovL25h MDEuc2FmZWxpbmtzLnByb3RlY3Rpb24ub3V0bG9vay5jb20vP3VybD1odHRwcyUzYSUyZiUyZnd3 dy5pDQo+IGV0Zi5vcmclMmZtYWlsbWFuJTJmbGlzdGluZm8lMmZjb3NlJmRhdGE9MDElN2MwMSU3 Y01pY2hhZWwuSm9uZXMlNDBtaWMNCj4gcm9zb2Z0LmNvbSU3Y2U2ZTk3N2UyMWJkYjQ2Mzg4ZWRi MDhkMmNjOTgzZWYyJTdjNzJmOTg4YmY4NmYxNDFhZjkxYWIyZA0KPiA3Y2QwMTFkYjQ3JTdjMSZz ZGF0YT1iVXZKanBDU2o0c0VheGlMODZ5cTg4ZWVrSWg5d3lLekVLWlNkN1BHTEVvJTNkDQo= From nobody Sun Oct 4 17:56:10 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 208841B3C56 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 17:56:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.378 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.378 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no 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 KOSD4xUnblkm for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 17:56:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ig0-x230.google.com (mail-ig0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::230]) (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 D65B11B3C53 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 17:56:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by igcrk20 with SMTP id rk20so50510330igc.1 for ; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 17:56:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=salesforce.com; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=nIgT6HGwlYeWg7zu6M02KHFM0fbmWKI4VCJG6mSKVnw=; b=NhHwv6eso/oBbjU7Vk4PGWyjnqubRb9++m9SOth982Fp6bcfdG2VHT7q3rIOsGqA8L Y17RRjYaVFuWzC8D0bFCdnEY321jj6n2bQ14W+2oftb1raxQFZPUckOaaO8Qh3yiwBe7 WijtXqqB22cDiEBOIJu5PJx9eWHTxA6/D04tA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=nIgT6HGwlYeWg7zu6M02KHFM0fbmWKI4VCJG6mSKVnw=; b=Tr5EasqcgF1DXWnKrLXlqz/YBERnknQes52rPUlikcuct+G9+SZbl1ifWvTcJtQmIw aS21wjd/qNYS0gCDTa3G/Xfb4FfPf+mx0TCoAhEftekU8/guCB9Yd0T96D/KmzGYButo 9vyzfPIa5ZxOvizOcVGyegRDiK6JeN3SjTx+IP9SUowbR/p64zA3xNDuIXEVSgXvhN3y ZKNmt5kVX9C+48pu6NVzO4qgqUQ5pin7s09zcVsvpgxVuzoJYmI4G388eivPiAAIjnA1 oKTF0LMxC7x8mqR4+mr9A7d7cG0JTdaSa5lwTOx53cg0rB7kpBY0EwKII5GYq6MSG/BE 8NOw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmAAQz3KV2DW/5Yo8yhw7QZA6cDt8CUAy9P4nMTxmdCLSN0X8ssrwoVI0iltNEuV3EQW0GX MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.64.244 with SMTP id r20mr6552112igs.6.1444006567213; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 17:56:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.227.41 with HTTP; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 17:56:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <01c501d0fe42$fe257a30$fa706e90$@augustcellars.com> References: <01c501d0fe42$fe257a30$fa706e90$@augustcellars.com> Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2015 17:56:05 -0700 Message-ID: From: Chuck Mortimore To: Jim Schaad Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bea3d227e4bd6052150fad8 Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] The use of RSA algorithms X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 00:56:09 -0000 --047d7bea3d227e4bd6052150fad8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I'd support leaving some support for RSA in place. "Thing" is a pretty broad term, and we expect to be dealing with a spectrum of capabilities in our services. On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Jim Schaad wrote: > I am intending to remove all RSA algorithms from the document. It does not > seem that this is going to be used by the IoT world due to size. It does > mean that the only signature algorithms left are going to be EC algorithms > which might be an IPR issue but RFC 6090 hopefully addresses that problem. > > I will be starting a local document on GitHub which will keep the RSA text > for either restoration if needed or for a new document. > > Jim > > > > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose > --047d7bea3d227e4bd6052150fad8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'd support leaving some support for RSA in place. =C2= =A0 "Thing" is a pretty broad term, and we expect to be dealing w= ith a spectrum of capabilities in our services.

On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Jim Sch= aad <ietf@augustcellars.com> wrote:
I am intending to remove all RSA algorithms from the docume= nt.=C2=A0 It does not
seem that this is going to be used by the IoT world due to size.=C2=A0 It d= oes
mean that the only signature algorithms left are going to be EC algorithms<= br> which might be an IPR issue but RFC 6090 hopefully addresses that problem.<= br>
I will be starting a local document on GitHub which will keep the RSA text<= br> for either restoration if needed or for a new document.

Jim



_______________________________________________
COSE mailing list
COSE@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose

--047d7bea3d227e4bd6052150fad8-- From nobody Sun Oct 4 20:02:31 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9107F1B411A for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 20:02:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.012 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.012 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, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=1.989, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 tDORbEILvWLU for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 20:02:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0738.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::738]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21B411B4114 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 20:02:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=pxVf/3pEVllH0her4s+YFgLEC3Rek+p0mHbxbOmxbWM=; b=lb2FFEADX3o9LbQt1kLPadCFTei8BPsAr0oT3Qhef3Y7+0yb89b6DBvkzThiBXmelFw5JOS4oPa3k18kDLAt+FBcPjt9ZEurVOURnEHJKYC7JNnokiEtMNSikM/BKWU+4qlJfc2oDvCzlvXEbGIMTZdGBpfb72MS1S8ELDHfj9c= Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.145) by BY2PR03MB443.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.280.20; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 03:02:04 +0000 Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) by BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) with mapi id 15.01.0280.021; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 03:02:04 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: Chuck Mortimore , Jim Schaad Thread-Topic: [COSE] The use of RSA algorithms Thread-Index: AdD+QqNVySs9YXxqTVGb4l89rbYpgAAxfmCAAARVY4A= Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 03:02:03 +0000 Message-ID: References: <01c501d0fe42$fe257a30$fa706e90$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; x-originating-ip: [50.47.89.201] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR03MB443; 5:OGjNsYZ5dYLWSkq/TKIL5hujFEHzWim5QXe+Eo9KB2vfTDB72s0xg5LtniKRoc9cj3nXIsEbgDvTbhRPaPETh0/ETSkAW9uu0K7+eQbHWB4LOtGaP7CgRuy1wVVwxc0ILJrPBUzhcijuCdw1s8ggFA==; 24:Ezof4cGe3DptjzmMMYGgirmbh4lM20N/IJqFkByNpYTfhKuzlOWa39EckUWN5C3i6k66+kzd65qLom5FOm/addLkPEeShCvHpql/iV4vk+0=; 20:LiBkSM9OpzSSOOLQgWpgbRt65POw6RPeyE+Ri9SqjyJ5Tref67MSwNKocw4seIjG81GaHD6kUV37PcKcyUFUsw== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR03MB443; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(108003899814671); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425024)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(61426024)(61427024); SRVR:BY2PR03MB443; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR03MB443; x-forefront-prvs: 07200C0526 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(377454003)(24454002)(199003)(189002)(5004730100002)(15975445007)(102836002)(92566002)(77096005)(2900100001)(76576001)(40100003)(68736005)(2950100001)(19617315012)(122556002)(19625215002)(86612001)(5003600100002)(5007970100001)(101416001)(66066001)(64706001)(8990500004)(11100500001)(5001830100001)(76176999)(19300405004)(46102003)(86362001)(81156007)(5001860100001)(77156002)(4001540100001)(5001770100001)(74316001)(97736004)(62966003)(10290500002)(12110500001)(5008740100001)(10090500001)(5005710100001)(10400500002)(19580405001)(50986999)(19580395003)(19609705001)(16236675004)(54356999)(105586002)(87936001)(5002640100001)(106356001)(99286002)(33656002)(5001960100002)(189998001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR03MB443; H:BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BY2PR03MB442079F3667DB697B89188BF5480BY2PR03MB442namprd_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 05 Oct 2015 03:02:03.2603 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR03MB443 Archived-At: Cc: "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] The use of RSA algorithms X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 03:02:30 -0000 --_000_BY2PR03MB442079F3667DB697B89188BF5480BY2PR03MB442namprd_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 KzENCg0KUlNBIGFsZ29yaXRobXMgYXJlIHRoZSBtb3N0IHdpZGVseSB1c2VkLCBieSBmYXIuICBQ bGVhc2Uga2VlcCB0aGVtIGluIHBsYWNlLCB0byBlbmhhbmNlIGludGVyb3BlcmFiaWxpdHkuICBJ dCBkb2VzIG5vIGhhcm0gdG8ga2VlcCB0aGVtLCBhcyBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbnMgZG9u4oCZdCBoYXZl IHRvIHVzZSB0aGVtIGlmIHRoZXnigJlyZSBub3QgYSBnb29kIGZpdCBmb3IgdGhlaXIgdXNlIGNh c2VzLiAgS2VlcGluZyB0aGVtIGlzIG5vdCBnb2luZyB0byBjYXVzZSB1cyB0byBydW4gb3V0IG9m IHNob3J0IGFsZ29yaXRobSBpZGVudGlmaWVycy4NCg0KICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgLS0gTWlrZQ0KDQpGcm9tOiBDT1NF IFttYWlsdG86Y29zZS1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnXSBPbiBCZWhhbGYgT2YgQ2h1Y2sgTW9ydGlt b3JlDQpTZW50OiBTdW5kYXksIE9jdG9iZXIgMDQsIDIwMTUgNTo1NiBQTQ0KVG86IEppbSBTY2hh YWQNCkNjOiBjb3NlQGlldGYub3JnDQpTdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogW0NPU0VdIFRoZSB1c2Ugb2YgUlNB IGFsZ29yaXRobXMNCg0KSSdkIHN1cHBvcnQgbGVhdmluZyBzb21lIHN1cHBvcnQgZm9yIFJTQSBp biBwbGFjZS4gICAiVGhpbmciIGlzIGEgcHJldHR5IGJyb2FkIHRlcm0sIGFuZCB3ZSBleHBlY3Qg dG8gYmUgZGVhbGluZyB3aXRoIGEgc3BlY3RydW0gb2YgY2FwYWJpbGl0aWVzIGluIG91ciBzZXJ2 aWNlcy4NCg0KT24gU2F0LCBPY3QgMywgMjAxNSBhdCA2OjIxIFBNLCBKaW0gU2NoYWFkIDxpZXRm QGF1Z3VzdGNlbGxhcnMuY29tPG1haWx0bzppZXRmQGF1Z3VzdGNlbGxhcnMuY29tPj4gd3JvdGU6 DQpJIGFtIGludGVuZGluZyB0byByZW1vdmUgYWxsIFJTQSBhbGdvcml0aG1zIGZyb20gdGhlIGRv Y3VtZW50LiAgSXQgZG9lcyBub3QNCnNlZW0gdGhhdCB0aGlzIGlzIGdvaW5nIHRvIGJlIHVzZWQg YnkgdGhlIElvVCB3b3JsZCBkdWUgdG8gc2l6ZS4gIEl0IGRvZXMNCm1lYW4gdGhhdCB0aGUgb25s eSBzaWduYXR1cmUgYWxnb3JpdGhtcyBsZWZ0IGFyZSBnb2luZyB0byBiZSBFQyBhbGdvcml0aG1z DQp3aGljaCBtaWdodCBiZSBhbiBJUFIgaXNzdWUgYnV0IFJGQyA2MDkwIGhvcGVmdWxseSBhZGRy ZXNzZXMgdGhhdCBwcm9ibGVtLg0KDQpJIHdpbGwgYmUgc3RhcnRpbmcgYSBsb2NhbCBkb2N1bWVu dCBvbiBHaXRIdWIgd2hpY2ggd2lsbCBrZWVwIHRoZSBSU0EgdGV4dA0KZm9yIGVpdGhlciByZXN0 b3JhdGlvbiBpZiBuZWVkZWQgb3IgZm9yIGEgbmV3IGRvY3VtZW50Lg0KDQpKaW0NCg0KDQoNCl9f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQpDT1NFIG1haWxp bmcgbGlzdA0KQ09TRUBpZXRmLm9yZzxtYWlsdG86Q09TRUBpZXRmLm9yZz4NCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3 LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vY29zZTxodHRwczovL25hMDEuc2FmZWxpbmtzLnBy b3RlY3Rpb24ub3V0bG9vay5jb20vP3VybD1odHRwcyUzYSUyZiUyZnd3dy5pZXRmLm9yZyUyZm1h aWxtYW4lMmZsaXN0aW5mbyUyZmNvc2UmZGF0YT0wMSU3YzAxJTdjTWljaGFlbC5Kb25lcyU0MG1p Y3Jvc29mdC5jb20lN2NlNGEyNWI1NWVjNGQ0NzRlMTIxMTA4ZDJjZDFmYzNkYyU3YzcyZjk4OGJm ODZmMTQxYWY5MWFiMmQ3Y2QwMTFkYjQ3JTdjMSZzZGF0YT1Sanl4UGpFJTJmSXFtR21LNjllVkY1 M1hKdGc5RlpPeUQ0JTJmQXlaWnNpT2VOTSUzZD4NCg0K --_000_BY2PR03MB442079F3667DB697B89188BF5480BY2PR03MB442namprd_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6dj0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTp2bWwiIHhtbG5zOm89InVy bjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206b2ZmaWNlOm9mZmljZSIgeG1sbnM6dz0idXJuOnNjaGVt YXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6d29yZCIgeG1sbnM6bT0iaHR0cDovL3NjaGVtYXMubWlj cm9zb2Z0LmNvbS9vZmZpY2UvMjAwNC8xMi9vbW1sIiB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcv VFIvUkVDLWh0bWw0MCI+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIg Y29udGVudD0idGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjxtZXRhIG5hbWU9IkdlbmVyYXRv ciIgY29udGVudD0iTWljcm9zb2Z0IFdvcmQgMTQgKGZpbHRlcmVkIG1lZGl1bSkiPg0KPHN0eWxl PjwhLS0NCi8qIEZvbnQgRGVmaW5pdGlvbnMgKi8NCkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6 Q2FsaWJyaTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDE1IDUgMiAyIDIgNCAzIDIgNDt9DQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJ e2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OlRhaG9tYTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDExIDYgNCAzIDUgNCA0IDIgNDt9DQov KiBTdHlsZSBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KcC5Nc29Ob3JtYWwsIGxpLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgZGl2Lk1z b05vcm1hbA0KCXttYXJnaW46MGluOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206LjAwMDFwdDsNCglmb250LXNp emU6MTIuMHB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4iLCJzZXJpZiI7fQ0KYTps aW5rLCBzcGFuLk1zb0h5cGVybGluaw0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6OTk7DQoJY29sb3I6 Ymx1ZTsNCgl0ZXh0LWRlY29yYXRpb246dW5kZXJsaW5lO30NCmE6dmlzaXRlZCwgc3Bhbi5Nc29I eXBlcmxpbmtGb2xsb3dlZA0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6OTk7DQoJY29sb3I6cHVycGxl Ow0KCXRleHQtZGVjb3JhdGlvbjp1bmRlcmxpbmU7fQ0Kc3Bhbi5FbWFpbFN0eWxlMTcNCgl7bXNv LXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6cGVyc29uYWwtcmVwbHk7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLCJzYW5z LXNlcmlmIjsNCgljb2xvcjojMDAyMDYwO30NCi5Nc29DaHBEZWZhdWx0DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10 eXBlOmV4cG9ydC1vbmx5Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI7fQ0K QHBhZ2UgV29yZFNlY3Rpb24xDQoJe3NpemU6OC41aW4gMTEuMGluOw0KCW1hcmdpbjoxLjBpbiAx LjBpbiAxLjBpbiAxLjBpbjt9DQpkaXYuV29yZFNlY3Rpb24xDQoJe3BhZ2U6V29yZFNlY3Rpb24x O30NCi0tPjwvc3R5bGU+PCEtLVtpZiBndGUgbXNvIDldPjx4bWw+DQo8bzpzaGFwZWRlZmF1bHRz IHY6ZXh0PSJlZGl0IiBzcGlkbWF4PSIxMDI2IiAvPg0KPC94bWw+PCFbZW5kaWZdLS0+PCEtLVtp ZiBndGUgbXNvIDldPjx4bWw+DQo8bzpzaGFwZWxheW91dCB2OmV4dD0iZWRpdCI+DQo8bzppZG1h cCB2OmV4dD0iZWRpdCIgZGF0YT0iMSIgLz4NCjwvbzpzaGFwZWxheW91dD48L3htbD48IVtlbmRp Zl0tLT4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IGxhbmc9IkVOLVVTIiBsaW5rPSJibHVlIiB2bGluaz0icHVy cGxlIj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMSI+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48 c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1 b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzAwMjA2MCI+JiM0MzsxPG86cD48L286 cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6 ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlm JnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOiMwMDIwNjAiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNs YXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5 OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMDAyMDYw Ij5SU0EgYWxnb3JpdGhtcyBhcmUgdGhlIG1vc3Qgd2lkZWx5IHVzZWQsIGJ5IGZhci4mbmJzcDsg UGxlYXNlIGtlZXAgdGhlbSBpbiBwbGFjZSwgdG8gZW5oYW5jZSBpbnRlcm9wZXJhYmlsaXR5LiZu YnNwOyBJdCBkb2VzIG5vIGhhcm0gdG8ga2VlcCB0aGVtLCBhcyBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbnMgZG9u4oCZ dA0KIGhhdmUgdG8gdXNlIHRoZW0gaWYgdGhleeKAmXJlIG5vdCBhIGdvb2QgZml0IGZvciB0aGVp ciB1c2UgY2FzZXMuJm5ic3A7IEtlZXBpbmcgdGhlbSBpcyBub3QgZ29pbmcgdG8gY2F1c2UgdXMg dG8gcnVuIG91dCBvZiBzaG9ydCBhbGdvcml0aG0gaWRlbnRpZmllcnMuPG86cD48L286cD48L3Nw YW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4w cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7 O2NvbG9yOiMwMDIwNjAiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJN c29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90 O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMDAyMDYwIj4mbmJz cDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsm bmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJz cDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsm bmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJz cDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsm bmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJz cDsmbmJzcDsgLS0gTWlrZTxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3Jt YWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGli cmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMDAyMDYwIj48bzpwPiZuYnNw OzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48Yj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0i Zm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtUYWhvbWEmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fu cy1zZXJpZiZxdW90OyI+RnJvbTo8L3NwYW4+PC9iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAu MHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O1RhaG9tYSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7 Ij4gQ09TRSBbbWFpbHRvOmNvc2UtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZ10NCjxiPk9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZiA8 L2I+Q2h1Y2sgTW9ydGltb3JlPGJyPg0KPGI+U2VudDo8L2I+IFN1bmRheSwgT2N0b2JlciAwNCwg MjAxNSA1OjU2IFBNPGJyPg0KPGI+VG86PC9iPiBKaW0gU2NoYWFkPGJyPg0KPGI+Q2M6PC9iPiBj b3NlQGlldGYub3JnPGJyPg0KPGI+U3ViamVjdDo8L2I+IFJlOiBbQ09TRV0gVGhlIHVzZSBvZiBS U0EgYWxnb3JpdGhtczxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwi PjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPkknZCBz dXBwb3J0IGxlYXZpbmcgc29tZSBzdXBwb3J0IGZvciBSU0EgaW4gcGxhY2UuICZuYnNwOyAmcXVv dDtUaGluZyZxdW90OyBpcyBhIHByZXR0eSBicm9hZCB0ZXJtLCBhbmQgd2UgZXhwZWN0IHRvIGJl IGRlYWxpbmcgd2l0aCBhIHNwZWN0cnVtIG9mIGNhcGFiaWxpdGllcyBpbiBvdXIgc2VydmljZXMu PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48bzpw PiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj5PbiBTYXQsIE9j dCAzLCAyMDE1IGF0IDY6MjEgUE0sIEppbSBTY2hhYWQgJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzppZXRm QGF1Z3VzdGNlbGxhcnMuY29tIiB0YXJnZXQ9Il9ibGFuayI+aWV0ZkBhdWd1c3RjZWxsYXJzLmNv bTwvYT4mZ3Q7IHdyb3RlOjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+SSBh bSBpbnRlbmRpbmcgdG8gcmVtb3ZlIGFsbCBSU0EgYWxnb3JpdGhtcyBmcm9tIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVu dC4mbmJzcDsgSXQgZG9lcyBub3Q8YnI+DQpzZWVtIHRoYXQgdGhpcyBpcyBnb2luZyB0byBiZSB1 c2VkIGJ5IHRoZSBJb1Qgd29ybGQgZHVlIHRvIHNpemUuJm5ic3A7IEl0IGRvZXM8YnI+DQptZWFu IHRoYXQgdGhlIG9ubHkgc2lnbmF0dXJlIGFsZ29yaXRobXMgbGVmdCBhcmUgZ29pbmcgdG8gYmUg RUMgYWxnb3JpdGhtczxicj4NCndoaWNoIG1pZ2h0IGJlIGFuIElQUiBpc3N1ZSBidXQgUkZDIDYw OTAgaG9wZWZ1bGx5IGFkZHJlc3NlcyB0aGF0IHByb2JsZW0uPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KSSB3aWxsIGJl IHN0YXJ0aW5nIGEgbG9jYWwgZG9jdW1lbnQgb24gR2l0SHViIHdoaWNoIHdpbGwga2VlcCB0aGUg UlNBIHRleHQ8YnI+DQpmb3IgZWl0aGVyIHJlc3RvcmF0aW9uIGlmIG5lZWRlZCBvciBmb3IgYSBu ZXcgZG9jdW1lbnQuPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KSmltPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX188YnI+DQpDT1NFIG1haWxp bmcgbGlzdDxicj4NCjxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpDT1NFQGlldGYub3JnIj5DT1NFQGlldGYub3Jn PC9hPjxicj4NCjxhIGhyZWY9Imh0dHBzOi8vbmEwMS5zYWZlbGlua3MucHJvdGVjdGlvbi5vdXRs b29rLmNvbS8/dXJsPWh0dHBzJTNhJTJmJTJmd3d3LmlldGYub3JnJTJmbWFpbG1hbiUyZmxpc3Rp bmZvJTJmY29zZSZhbXA7ZGF0YT0wMSU3YzAxJTdjTWljaGFlbC5Kb25lcyU0MG1pY3Jvc29mdC5j b20lN2NlNGEyNWI1NWVjNGQ0NzRlMTIxMTA4ZDJjZDFmYzNkYyU3YzcyZjk4OGJmODZmMTQxYWY5 MWFiMmQ3Y2QwMTFkYjQ3JTdjMSZhbXA7c2RhdGE9Ump5eFBqRSUyZklxbUdtSzY5ZVZGNTNYSnRn OUZaT3lENCUyZkF5WlpzaU9lTk0lM2QiIHRhcmdldD0iX2JsYW5rIj5odHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRm Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2Nvc2U8L2E+PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxw IGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4N CjwvYm9keT4NCjwvaHRtbD4NCg== --_000_BY2PR03MB442079F3667DB697B89188BF5480BY2PR03MB442namprd_-- From nobody Sun Oct 4 21:57:23 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 577BD1B440A for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:57:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 soP1UlC7dVZy for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:57:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp1.pacifier.net (smtp1.pacifier.net [64.255.237.171]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A4891B440C for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:57:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (c-24-21-96-37.hsd1.or.comcast.net [24.21.96.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp1.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7508F2CA2B; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:57:19 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: "'Mike Jones'" References: <01c401d0fe3b$c458e4b0$4d0aae10$@augustcellars.com> <56108D66.40804@tzi.org> <01d001d0fe4d$1db5e060$5921a120$@augustcellars.com> <01f601d0fec9$a9cb9f00$fd62dd00$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2015 21:54:46 -0700 Message-ID: <027601d0ff29$f5b44b00$e11ce100$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQGLSi46CvNF2pX8+9Owndt0tLSnDwGMTUDoAvdVRB8BcmQUXgHxqBhIAksKM3WelihKMA== Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Compression of content X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 04:57:22 -0000 In a word CRIME. There have been some significant attacks against compression in TLS and = other places where the amount of compression is leaking information = about the content. For this reason compression is being removed from = TLS entirely. The statement being made is that for protocols that need = compression, it is significantly better for the protocols to provide the = compression inside of the protocol where they can do the appropriate = security analysis. jim > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Jones [mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com] > Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2015 10:58 AM > To: Jim Schaad ; 'Carsten Bormann' = > Cc: cose@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [COSE] Compression of content >=20 > That's certainly not true. For instance, I'm sure we're making a = statement that > the algorithm header parameter must be understood (whether it's worded = that > way or not). >=20 > You didn't answer my main point, which is that there needs to be a = compelling > case stated to remove it if we're going to do so and the working group = needs to > agree with that case - something that hasn't happened. Otherwise, = given it's > important functionality, our default decision should be to retain it. >=20 > -- Mike >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Schaad [mailto:ietf@augustcellars.com] > Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2015 10:25 AM > To: Mike Jones; 'Carsten Bormann' > Cc: cose@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [COSE] Compression of content >=20 > We are not making any statements about must understand in the COSE > documents. We are providing features that application profiles are = going to be > able to say it must be understood, or it must be ignored. I don't buy = that as an > argument about saying that it needs to be included now. >=20 > Jim >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mike Jones [mailto:Michael.Jones@microsoft.com] > > Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2015 10:34 PM > > To: Jim Schaad ; 'Carsten Bormann' > > > > Cc: cose@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [COSE] Compression of content > > > > I believe that removing the compression capability doesn't pass the > > chairs' test "What Would JOSE Do?". (See slide 14 in the chairs' > > presentation > > = https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3a%2f%2fwww.i > > = etf.org%2fproceedings%2f93%2fslides%2fslides-93-cose-2.pdf&data=3D01%7c0 > > > 1%7cMichael.Jones%40microsoft.com%7ccae98a10553448c7a4f208d2cce1272 > a%7 > > > c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=3Da1X91Q2GkbhB23vhriXIs2JY > 2V > > iSzvYuP49At9EYcTk%3d and the following slides.) > > > > Carsten's point that compression is a "must understand" feature is > > also important. If we don't keep it now, we'll never be able to > > obtain the important "must understand" property after the fact. > > > > I have heard no compelling reason to remove compression. Therefore, > > we should keep it. > > > > -- Mike > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: COSE [mailto:cose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jim Schaad > > Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2015 7:34 PM > > To: 'Carsten Bormann' > > Cc: cose@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [COSE] Compression of content > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Carsten Bormann [mailto:cabo@tzi.org] > > > Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2015 7:23 PM > > > To: Jim Schaad > > > Cc: cose@ietf.org > > > Subject: Re: [COSE] Compression of content > > > > > > Interesting. > > > > > > -- With the JOSE versions of these parameters already defined, = what > > > is the practical effect of not having that parameter here? > > > Implementations that want it are likely to simply use it anwyay. > > > (However, in JOSE this is a "MUST understand" parameter -- if we > > > don't have it initially, it can't be that, and the usage it is = going > > > to get anyway is maybe > > > perilous.) > > > > Are you arguing that we should keep it? Going either way is easy, = but > > pulling it is a quicker finish. > > > > > > > > -- More meta: Are we really in the business of guessing what is of > > > interest in the IoT world? Where we optimize specifically for the > > > IoT world, we of course have to. But do we have to make a = consensus > > > decision about that for every single parameter of JOSE? > > > > This is why I am advertising what I plan to do. So that people have = a chance to > > give a solid argument to keep it if they think it should be kept. = There do seem > to > > be some that think that the IoT world is really all that we should = care about. > > > > Jim > > > > > > > > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > > > > > > > > > Jim Schaad wrote: > > > > I intend to remove the parameter which tags the ability to do > > > > compression of content. > > > > > > > > I do not believe that this is of interest in the IoT world. If = it > > > > becomes necessary later for other systems it can be defined = then. > > > > > > > > Jim > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > COSE mailing list > > > > COSE@ietf.org > > > > = https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3a%2f%2fw > > > > ww > > > > > > = .ietf.org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fcose&data=3D01%7c01%7cMichael.Jones%4 > > > > > > > 0microsoft.com%7c6c9c6326813542907faf08d2cc649e62%7c72f988bf86f141af > > > > > > > 91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=3DpdSJYs5BMeV6YeZR%2fc4gAkF0yy4SIjh494q%2 > > fy > > > > NKysUY%3d > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > COSE mailing list > > COSE@ietf.org > > > = https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3a%2f%2fwww.ie= tf. > > > org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fcose%0a&data=3D01%7c01%7cMichael.Jones%40m > > > icrosoft.com%7c6c9c6326813542907faf08d2cc649e62%7c72f988bf86f141af91 > > > ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=3DZVRSqXYMRyXrSTLsVtjYSjRFtrOGZU4Vn%2fQBzyU > > ckoE%3d From nobody Sun Oct 4 22:08:12 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90F511B4480 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 22:08:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 PAulY3ckaGfs for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 22:08:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qg0-f43.google.com (mail-qg0-f43.google.com [209.85.192.43]) (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 7440B1B447E for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 22:08:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qgx61 with SMTP id 61so140314584qgx.3 for ; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 22:08:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=upAoZCLKOPOFAqxxfmLJ170F2FyywE6Q7H9ewNF4O2M=; b=PuzhIXIsAgYmAuLpVl3sfTRg008fN031Lhijy58XJux+PTgDWHgww/E4n5Vl0fDM0y GhqkuE6npdP64SSZyAXiBHjkPy9ETDT0HnQeois7xKSVUiDubUWJq06Q8oyD3b1Gm7Gs rB8yfC7gCZvJ0meKFq+6sRXz5GU/gBJZapqqkyJMRy+gsVC9iAx1c/sx8dWVURaStdI+ 8jWJYS7UYc7dB5IKqhfoonjAqsFeFQNyS4I/nbQp6yktQtELrCSkZznRMfqdw3Z+ntLc 0UTPZM2ojWkT7CitnXmGXNrZYKNJV/XQEwBujU4jkVuyTE+G3Z1hBqJA+hj5kqjj4HoY JRAg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmaUIEBJ7gLU6D5Lepc4Ie+/Y0PMJk8l9trnowbymGyJ9+bBQKCof8JaLvEanWJANru6bNl MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.55.197.28 with SMTP id p28mr6520708qki.80.1444021687495; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 22:08:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.55.179.69 with HTTP; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 22:08:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <56108D66.40804@tzi.org> References: <01c401d0fe3b$c458e4b0$4d0aae10$@augustcellars.com> <56108D66.40804@tzi.org> Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 07:08:07 +0200 Message-ID: From: Samuel Erdtman To: Carsten Bormann Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1149a300bb67f00521547fd6 Archived-At: Cc: Jim Schaad , cose Subject: Re: [COSE] Compression of content X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 05:08:10 -0000 --001a1149a300bb67f00521547fd6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I cannot se the big benefit of removing it and I like the idea of COSE going as much as possible in line with JOSE so that if I=C2=B4m familiar wi= th one of the protocols I would quickly understand the other one. Best Regards Samuel Erdtman On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 4:22 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote: > Interesting. > > -- With the JOSE versions of these parameters already defined, what is > the practical effect of not having that parameter here? Implementations > that want it are likely to simply use it anwyay. > (However, in JOSE this is a "MUST understand" parameter -- if we don't > have it initially, it can't be that, and the usage it is going to get > anyway is maybe perilous.) > > -- More meta: Are we really in the business of guessing what is of > interest in the IoT world? Where we optimize specifically for the IoT > world, we of course have to. But do we have to make a consensus > decision about that for every single parameter of JOSE? > > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten > > > Jim Schaad wrote: > > I intend to remove the parameter which tags the ability to do > compression of > > content. > > > > I do not believe that this is of interest in the IoT world. If it > becomes > > necessary later for other systems it can be defined then. > > > > Jim > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > COSE mailing list > > COSE@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose > > > > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose > --001a1149a300bb67f00521547fd6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I cannot se the big benefit of removing it and I like the = idea of COSE going as much as possible in line with JOSE so that if I=C2=B4= m familiar with one of the protocols I would quickly understand the other o= ne.

Best Regards
Samuel Erdtman

On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 = at 4:22 AM, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
Interesting.

-- With the JOSE versions of these parameters already defined, what is
the practical effect of not having that parameter here?=C2=A0 Implementatio= ns
that want it are likely to simply use it anwyay.
(However, in JOSE this is a "MUST understand" parameter -- if we = don't
have it initially, it can't be that, and the usage it is going to get anyway is maybe perilous.)

-- More meta: Are we really in the business of guessing what is of
interest in the IoT world?=C2=A0 Where we optimize specifically for the IoT=
world, we of course have to.=C2=A0 But do we have to make a consensus
decision about that for every single parameter of JOSE?

Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten


Jim Schaad wrote:
> I intend to remove the parameter which tags the ability to do compress= ion of
> content.
>
> I do not believe that this is of interest in the IoT world.=C2=A0 If i= t becomes
> necessary later for other systems it can be defined then.
>
> Jim
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> COSE mailing list
> COSE@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
>

_______________________________________________
COSE mailing list
COSE@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose

--001a1149a300bb67f00521547fd6-- From nobody Sun Oct 4 22:10:39 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1690C1B446C for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 22:10:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 efv_Jj1a24FI for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 22:10:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qg0-f47.google.com (mail-qg0-f47.google.com [209.85.192.47]) (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 E66B51B4493 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 22:10:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qgt47 with SMTP id 47so140193864qgt.2 for ; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 22:10:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=LcSS0X95DcBdRUTq8A7Qt+vpjS7t1gc9asGQthiy/uE=; b=S3cOzKuEdfch4r/6egDyxpnklTkHaJsukFhs3o8PWe7IsR6KzPVZJgc0psMGjj8XPP NRE5bj9FO9xjNaG/Bd6ufQFZJQ5dXZ7mGiUb+hFGSEXmfjN7Z+LfadDMki0My/DVfl1T 8juWajHyZeohE2o3H259NXI1AfEtlbqVcbOPw1ITx4Y8pEShMJHtO0MgzdygOf/hXt/7 cQd+iNnL2eAtAD/ejSBKMp2NqFaGNbyM3VxjKenV+CZyKDwhzFf6s19ytLeJSm9Ax4+e aCGkjTuI+FiwSOp+K74DyPhwETw9G7HKzquWPdqaOobwavCa7+AMVSnbQbjdyAD9vdpg vTHw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkBUzgUNls3pTlyVhFEu0kG2HxUJDh/2Ihut3GcmZMmULJxyfkF6wa4JHrFktprjxVlaQRz MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.40.139 with SMTP id x11mr36482929qgx.41.1444021829103; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 22:10:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.55.179.69 with HTTP; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 22:10:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <01c501d0fe42$fe257a30$fa706e90$@augustcellars.com> Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 07:10:29 +0200 Message-ID: From: Samuel Erdtman To: Chuck Mortimore Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c121702bfc4e052154884b Archived-At: Cc: Jim Schaad , cose Subject: Re: [COSE] The use of RSA algorithms X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 05:10:38 -0000 --001a11c121702bfc4e052154884b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +1 Best Regards Samuel Erdtman On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 2:56 AM, Chuck Mortimore wrote: > I'd support leaving some support for RSA in place. "Thing" is a pretty > broad term, and we expect to be dealing with a spectrum of capabilities in > our services. > > On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Jim Schaad wrote: > >> I am intending to remove all RSA algorithms from the document. It does >> not >> seem that this is going to be used by the IoT world due to size. It does >> mean that the only signature algorithms left are going to be EC algorithms >> which might be an IPR issue but RFC 6090 hopefully addresses that problem. >> >> I will be starting a local document on GitHub which will keep the RSA text >> for either restoration if needed or for a new document. >> >> Jim >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> COSE mailing list >> COSE@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose >> > > > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose > > --001a11c121702bfc4e052154884b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+1

Best Regards
Samuel Erdtma= n

On M= on, Oct 5, 2015 at 2:56 AM, Chuck Mortimore <cmortimore@salesfor= ce.com> wrote:
I'd support leaving some support for RSA in place. =C2=A0 "Th= ing" is a pretty broad term, and we expect to be dealing with a spectr= um of capabilities in our services.

On Sat, O= ct 3, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> wrote:
I am intending to remove all R= SA algorithms from the document.=C2=A0 It does not
seem that this is going to be used by the IoT world due to size.=C2=A0 It d= oes
mean that the only signature algorithms left are going to be EC algorithms<= br> which might be an IPR issue but RFC 6090 hopefully addresses that problem.<= br>
I will be starting a local document on GitHub which will keep the RSA text<= br> for either restoration if needed or for a new document.

Jim



_______________________________________________
COSE mailing list
COSE@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose


_______________________________________________
COSE mailing list
COSE@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose


--001a11c121702bfc4e052154884b-- From nobody Sun Oct 4 23:44:11 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE8301B49A8 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 23:44:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 v5cq6rPh-Arm for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 23:44:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-f182.google.com (mail-lb0-f182.google.com [209.85.217.182]) (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 A0F291B49A6 for ; Sun, 4 Oct 2015 23:44:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lbcao8 with SMTP id ao8so52334082lbc.3 for ; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 23:44:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type; bh=qMHUXcvOJYDtckGuEZdE6scXetQt5rsZhwqiWanX4cQ=; b=BiYLstIKIgIx7E1EpaTg3RBd6WMuu4CHIMB+P+mk/xyw6tFI1K1hYxkgLVfwrhwn1/ p5WN4V2rd/Fo9vRMfK35AZWAaDSE7SANgtcUl/4wgP+UDO7TCLTP0/244qkHtI+BCUPD zD2kKH7i0XghuEdivPSy/BH1ToY6Q+h91cpljDtF7LeVHV6oqo7RCWq54MefI8iWIP9m dD/RF2hoXAgeZZv641vpm3MI2zVWfg9utq+HGpJYDaxnQXshB9HUhB5nAQylg5xq3/Vc ynuuhgB9j26BHTSmUd/+M1EXReNTW/AOw+O+xspbxInAH3vHZriZmlmaCXMrcNPFvIrl gmmg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlECcYakD4KmVKryyJK9qUr7UqY/2M5eifYLBIxtlzmV+kBagmFirBKORrq0dS2D5Dz+MiI X-Received: by 10.112.198.198 with SMTP id je6mr10990171lbc.31.1444027446817; Sun, 04 Oct 2015 23:44:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.108] ([85.235.11.178]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ug2sm3893673lbc.34.2015.10.04.23.44.05 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 04 Oct 2015 23:44:06 -0700 (PDT) To: cose@ietf.org References: <01c501d0fe42$fe257a30$fa706e90$@augustcellars.com> From: Ludwig Seitz Message-ID: <56121C2E.1050306@sics.se> Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 08:43:58 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <01c501d0fe42$fe257a30$fa706e90$@augustcellars.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="------------ms090700010408030708080005" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [COSE] The use of RSA algorithms X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 06:44:11 -0000 This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms090700010408030708080005 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2015-10-04 03:21, Jim Schaad wrote: > I am intending to remove all RSA algorithms from the document. It does= not > seem that this is going to be used by the IoT world due to size. It do= es > mean that the only signature algorithms left are going to be EC algorit= hms > which might be an IPR issue but RFC 6090 hopefully addresses that probl= em. > > I will be starting a local document on GitHub which will keep the RSA t= ext > for either restoration if needed or for a new document. > > Jim > > As long as they are not mandatory to implement I could live with leaving = them in place. /Ludwig --=20 Ludwig Seitz, PhD SICS Swedish ICT AB Ideon Science Park Building Beta 2 Scheelev=E4gen 17 SE-223 70 Lund Phone +46(0)70-349 92 51 http://www.sics.se --------------ms090700010408030708080005 Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExDzANBglghkgBZQMEAgEFADCABgkqhkiG9w0BBwEAAKCC DFQwggYYMIIFAKADAgECAgMMhpgwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYw FAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZp Y2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAxIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJt ZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTAeFw0xNTAxMDgwODM5MDZaFw0xNjAxMDkyMjQxMzBaMDgxFzAV BgNVBAMMDmx1ZHdpZ0BzaWNzLnNlMR0wGwYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFg5sdWR3aWdAc2ljcy5zZTCC ASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMVB4rAuq4FxbARxwRqPLpc/3C194F+V H4XMKK6fu3Y8zDLijzNSjh6tG41oZhXvJcvAs1nZNjUutNLeyBAUFiYhy7HXNdlKpjbMEFKQ +6KpEdZ0Rk+pXgB2E1mqZEfp3M2djcQ/h+7uGVlSGYNAxYk6rWPIIWBx2GMvAQaHP4xxu/F+ PiSQILOVzmtIFZe1t/Lw71aaNeMYVhARo8z5PVsVoq6gBeujxfiRLtiQ/S8xW6RKvNvUkVyT BQfcKaEDZR9FENNf9rFgiAcT6R7hI8RBf1d2fxdlbDU8uM72K3fvzGDt8N9Bfm1kDWbDBxJE 1taRIYs+60D1kwV6DvBb9MECAwEAAaOCAtQwggLQMAkGA1UdEwQCMAAwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgSw MB0GA1UdJQQWMBQGCCsGAQUFBwMCBggrBgEFBQcDBDAdBgNVHQ4EFgQU6ryrKahJtBOEdbIL AAWCpOsQyagwHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUU3Ltkpzg2ssBXHx+ljVO8tS4UYIwGQYDVR0RBBIwEIEO bHVkd2lnQHNpY3Muc2UwggFMBgNVHSAEggFDMIIBPzCCATsGCysGAQQBgbU3AQIDMIIBKjAu BggrBgEFBQcCARYiaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vcG9saWN5LnBkZjCB9wYIKwYB BQUHAgIwgeowJxYgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwAwIBARqBvlRo aXMgY2VydGlmaWNhdGUgd2FzIGlzc3VlZCBhY2NvcmRpbmcgdG8gdGhlIENsYXNzIDEgVmFs aWRhdGlvbiByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENBIHBvbGljeSwgcmVsaWFu Y2Ugb25seSBmb3IgdGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHB1cnBvc2UgaW4gY29tcGxpYW5jZSBvZiB0aGUg cmVseWluZyBwYXJ0eSBvYmxpZ2F0aW9ucy4wNgYDVR0fBC8wLTAroCmgJ4YlaHR0cDovL2Ny bC5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vY3J0dTEtY3JsLmNybDCBjgYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgYEwfzA5BggrBgEF BQcwAYYtaHR0cDovL29jc3Auc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3N1Yi9jbGFzczEvY2xpZW50L2NhMEIG CCsGAQUFBzAChjZodHRwOi8vYWlhLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jZXJ0cy9zdWIuY2xhc3MxLmNs aWVudC5jYS5jcnQwIwYDVR0SBBwwGoYYaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vMA0GCSqG SIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQBl8BbG0n7+JjFqiJOuAqMbkeqM6Oyd+4oHGu3fbaSiM1SKesae2bfm vifV99a+M4DERZ2SVkOYcvNlv31Q3hvYtzRjDOqewzVKxo021R3ddQULW1DhvTEpclikG5rd 0NRJQn+EkSwEKLeUj68i0dhU8ULhZDDq3A81cTcZzIGrTjNnwDvCktB/sF/iO4At6RJ24P3j KjYFPirW3NsvZ2gzZizSzeubPE0/cWcqEBJ/UtaFPF54efejjLuPRHHMLPDcvrwBhEiBxuG6 oTEo465g4pS9Vo/Z0GoZgZyA+aGQ+YPbPSsqsYmSBjZ6MGGDqQq0niE2dW+8IOdHQvMkqI52 MIIGNDCCBBygAwIBAgIBHjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADB9MQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UE ChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjErMCkGA1UECxMiU2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUg U2lnbmluZzEpMCcGA1UEAxMgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwHhcN MDcxMDI0MjEwMTU1WhcNMTcxMDI0MjEwMTU1WjCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoT DVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNp Z25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMTL1N0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDEgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUg Q2xpZW50IENBMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAxwmDzM4t2BqxKaQu E6uWvooyg4ymiEGWVUet1G8SD+rqvyNH4QrvnEIaFHxOhESip7vMz39ScLpNLbL1QpOlPW/t FIzNHS3qd2XRNYG5Sv9RcGE+T4qbLtsjjJbi6sL7Ls/f/X9ftTyhxvxWkf8KW37iKrueKsxw 2HqolH7GM6FX5UfNAwAu4ZifkpmZzU1slBhyWwaQPEPPZRsWoTb7q8hmgv6Nv3Hg9rmA1/VP BIOQ6SKRkHXG0Hhmq1dOFoAFI411+a/9nWm5rcVjGcIWZ2v/43Yksq60jExipA4l5uv9/+Hm 33mbgmCszdj/Dthf13tgAv2O83hLJ0exTqfrlwIDAQABo4IBrTCCAakwDwYDVR0TAQH/BAUw AwEB/zAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwHQYDVR0OBBYEFFNy7ZKc4NrLAVx8fpY1TvLUuFGCMB8G A1UdIwQYMBaAFE4L7xqkQFulF2mHMMo0aEPQQa7yMGYGCCsGAQUFBwEBBFowWDAnBggrBgEF BQcwAYYbaHR0cDovL29jc3Auc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2NhMC0GCCsGAQUFBzAChiFodHRwOi8v d3d3LnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9zZnNjYS5jcnQwWwYDVR0fBFQwUjAnoCWgI4YhaHR0cDovL3d3 dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vc2ZzY2EuY3JsMCegJaAjhiFodHRwOi8vY3JsLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNv bS9zZnNjYS5jcmwwgYAGA1UdIAR5MHcwdQYLKwYBBAGBtTcBAgEwZjAuBggrBgEFBQcCARYi aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vcG9saWN5LnBkZjA0BggrBgEFBQcCARYoaHR0cDov L3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vaW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAgEA CoMIfXirLAZcuGOMXq4cuSN3TaFx2H2GvD5VSy/6rV55BYHbWNaPeQn3oBSU8KgQZn/Kck1J xbLpAxVCNtsxeW1R87ifhsYZ0qjdrA9anrW2MAWCtosmAOT4OxK9QPoSjCMxM3HbkZCDJgnl E8jMopH21BbyAYr7b5EfGRQJNtgWcvqSXwKHnTutR08+Kkn0KAkXCzeQNLeA5LlYUzFyM7kP Ap8pIRMQ+seHunmyG642S2+y/qHEdMuGIwpfz3eDF1PdctL04qYK/zu+Qg1Bw0RwgigVZs/0 c5HP2/e9DBHh7eSwtzYlk4AUr6yxLlcwSjOfOmKEQ/Q8tzh0IFiNu9IPuTGAPBn4CPxD0+Ru 8T2wg8/s43R/PT3kd1OEqOJUl7q+h+r6fpvU0Fzxd2tC8Ga6fDEPme+1Nbi+03pVjuZQKbGw KJ66gEn06WqaxVZC+J8hh/jR0k9mST1iAZPNYulcNJ8tKmVtjYsv0L1TSm2+NwON58tO+pIV zu3DWwSEXSf+qkDavQam+QtEOZxLBXI++aMUEapSn+k3Lxm48ZCYfAWLb/Xj7F5JQMbZvCex glAbYR0kIHqW5DnsYSdMD/IplJMojx0NBrxJ3fN9dvX2Y6BIXRsF1du4qESm4/3CKuyUV7p9 DW3mPlHTGLvYxnyKQy7VFBkoLINszBrOUeIxggPtMIID6QIBATCBlDCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMC SUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENl cnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMTL1N0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDEgUHJpbWFyeSBJ bnRlcm1lZGlhdGUgQ2xpZW50IENBAgMMhpgwDQYJYIZIAWUDBAIBBQCgggIpMBgGCSqGSIb3 DQEJAzELBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkFMQ8XDTE1MTAwNTA2NDM1OFowLwYJKoZI hvcNAQkEMSIEIB9YCwjpUtskzk/xzWvlsAfeSfIPmntZz2iYhMUkcLKkMGwGCSqGSIb3DQEJ DzFfMF0wCwYJYIZIAWUDBAEqMAsGCWCGSAFlAwQBAjAKBggqhkiG9w0DBzAOBggqhkiG9w0D AgICAIAwDQYIKoZIhvcNAwICAUAwBwYFKw4DAgcwDQYIKoZIhvcNAwICASgwgaUGCSsGAQQB gjcQBDGBlzCBlDCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzAp BgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMTL1N0 YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDEgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUgQ2xpZW50IENBAgMMhpgwgacG CyqGSIb3DQEJEAILMYGXoIGUMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20g THRkLjErMCkGA1UECxMiU2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYG A1UEAxMvU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMSBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0EC AwyGmDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASCAQCtB51GbTsTxUqoIIOY7Hmsz/0Uz1n2SoHKfrc1KqD+ O7cPC/3Nqt+CTPgodiVq1jmvhxGMppt9oMVWd7QsJ1nRptMSGYK4wgbTnYObRL4uQMXDzJko gIpVxdtUSsJziM9bW1koWV/qOv3cwHw9GnZI1w9hSiN70+bokUBvR5wQLC9KTXxrXhvu0j2H gvgzi7ga1BrwwA9pzpKyrxlc+yAeAxup8swwVBStayroIRTezG7e5Nj7ADacQ5bJRtLZHh9H sMBAXwqM6jJ/IyDrHFV0dsW+8GXGUZiRO/aTX+QZJyPG3jJrq39rVIdC8W7Bz9M3YFugVbTC v+mtEV80++TRAAAAAAAA --------------ms090700010408030708080005-- From nobody Mon Oct 5 00:33:17 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5231F1B4B61 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 00:33:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 yQ01Mq8S6faZ for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 00:33:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-8.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-8.mit.edu [18.7.68.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A46F81B4B74 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 00:33:07 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 12074425-f79816d000004571-8d-561227b223a5 Received: from mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.35]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-8.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 8A.35.17777.2B722165; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 03:33:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id t957X5jp025830; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 03:33:06 -0400 Received: from [10.113.33.168] ([94.144.63.90]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as jricher@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id t957TWBq011923 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 5 Oct 2015 03:33:04 -0400 Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 09:33:02 +0200 Message-ID: Importance: normal From: Justin Richer To: Chuck Mortimore , Jim Schaad MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--_com.android.email_13673800856330" X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmpgleLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42IR4hRV1t2kLhRmsPWqnMWVZ19ZLaZtncpq sXr6dzYHZo+Nc6azeSxZ8pPJY/H5LqYA5igum5TUnMyy1CJ9uwSujOdrLjEWzNCpmNT6l7GB 8Z1WFyMnh4SAicSXrrksELaYxIV769m6GLk4hAQWM0lM2zuRHcLZwChxaucNJghnNZPE1hUP gMo4OFgEVCV2XZAA6RYW0JWYfuwQK4jNK+AmMfvdLbASTgEhia5dYCVsQNXT17QwgdgiAvES 817uZwOxmQUEJVY3TmKHaBWUODnzCQtEPFji+dqvjBMY+WYhSc1CkoKw1SX+zLvEDGErSkzp fsg+C2gzs4CaxLJWJWThBYxsqxhlU3KrdHMTM3OKU5N1i5MT8/JSi3Qt9HIzS/RSU0o3MYIC mt1FdQfjhENKhxgFOBiVeHglkgTDhFgTy4orcw8xSnIwKYnyzlITChPiS8pPqcxILM6ILyrN SS0+xCjBwawkwvv6P1A5b0piZVVqUT5MSpqDRUmcd9MPvhAhgfTEktTs1NSC1CKYrAwHh5IE bz7IUMGi1PTUirTMnBKENBMHJ8hwHqDh80BqeIsLEnOLM9Mh8qcYFaXEed1BEgIgiYzSPLhe UMKJm2Af9YpRHOgVYd5NIFU8wGQF1/0KaDAT0OB+ebDBJYkIKakGRuedWVb/g1iMTvJNqGSx eSLFIdWwq/Eju9+Mo3mB5armCTMfTH4eI2Xzt1BYsmjn7t25Vy/bB4hqvVMwFNq07Hj9uYsP 9I1OHnYocfsxRaSj6Jlzw63GzrcsCyI6d6v0Ksza9DpOx811bZXqZrPP00RWxM320upUVCo4 ftGWWfxU4177jjfcSizFGYmGWsxFxYkARb5G7hMDAAA= Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] The use of RSA algorithms X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 07:33:13 -0000 ----_com.android.email_13673800856330 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 CiAgICAKKENoYWlyKQpDcnlwdG8gYWdpbGl0eSBpcyBrZXkgaGVyZS4gV2hldGhlciByc2EgZnVu Y3Rpb25hbGl0eSBpcyBkZWxpdmVyZWQgaW4gdGhlIGNvcmUgZG9jIG9yIGluIGFuIGV4dGVuc2lv biBpcyBhIHNpbXBsZSBkb2N1bWVudCBtYW5hZ2VtZW50IGRlY2lzaW9uIGJ5IHRoZSBncm91cC4g SSB0aGluayB3ZSd2ZSBzZWVuIGVub3VnaCBvZiBhIGNhbGwgdG8gdHJ5IHB1bGxpbmcgaXQgb3V0 IGFzIEppbSBpcyBkb2luZyBhbmQgcG90ZW50aWFsbHkgZW5vdWdoIHRvIHN0YXJ0IHVwIGEgc2Vj b25kIGRyYWZ0IHRvIGtlZXAgZnVuY3Rpb25hbGl0eS4gRG9lcyB0aGF0IGxpbmUgdXAgd2l0aCB3 aGF0IG90aGVycyBhcmUgc2VlaW5nPyBJZiBzbzogQW55IHZvbHVudGVlcnMgdG8gZWRpdCBhbiBy c2EgZHJhZnQ/wqAKLS0gSnVzdGluCi8gU2VudCBmcm9tIG15IHBob25lIC8KCi0tLS0tLS0tIE9y aWdpbmFsIG1lc3NhZ2UgLS0tLS0tLS0KRnJvbTogQ2h1Y2sgTW9ydGltb3JlIDxjbW9ydGltb3Jl QHNhbGVzZm9yY2UuY29tPiAKRGF0ZTogMTAvNS8yMDE1ICAyOjU2IEFNICAoR01UKzAxOjAwKSAK VG86IEppbSBTY2hhYWQgPGlldGZAYXVndXN0Y2VsbGFycy5jb20+IApDYzogY29zZUBpZXRmLm9y ZyAKU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFtDT1NFXSBUaGUgdXNlIG9mIFJTQSBhbGdvcml0aG1zIAoKSSdkIHN1 cHBvcnQgbGVhdmluZyBzb21lIHN1cHBvcnQgZm9yIFJTQSBpbiBwbGFjZS4gwqAgIlRoaW5nIiBp cyBhIHByZXR0eSBicm9hZCB0ZXJtLCBhbmQgd2UgZXhwZWN0IHRvIGJlIGRlYWxpbmcgd2l0aCBh IHNwZWN0cnVtIG9mIGNhcGFiaWxpdGllcyBpbiBvdXIgc2VydmljZXMuCk9uIFNhdCwgT2N0IDMs IDIwMTUgYXQgNjoyMSBQTSwgSmltIFNjaGFhZCA8aWV0ZkBhdWd1c3RjZWxsYXJzLmNvbT4gd3Jv dGU6CkkgYW0gaW50ZW5kaW5nIHRvIHJlbW92ZSBhbGwgUlNBIGFsZ29yaXRobXMgZnJvbSB0aGUg ZG9jdW1lbnQuwqAgSXQgZG9lcyBub3QKCnNlZW0gdGhhdCB0aGlzIGlzIGdvaW5nIHRvIGJlIHVz ZWQgYnkgdGhlIElvVCB3b3JsZCBkdWUgdG8gc2l6ZS7CoCBJdCBkb2VzCgptZWFuIHRoYXQgdGhl IG9ubHkgc2lnbmF0dXJlIGFsZ29yaXRobXMgbGVmdCBhcmUgZ29pbmcgdG8gYmUgRUMgYWxnb3Jp dGhtcwoKd2hpY2ggbWlnaHQgYmUgYW4gSVBSIGlzc3VlIGJ1dCBSRkMgNjA5MCBob3BlZnVsbHkg YWRkcmVzc2VzIHRoYXQgcHJvYmxlbS4KCgoKSSB3aWxsIGJlIHN0YXJ0aW5nIGEgbG9jYWwgZG9j dW1lbnQgb24gR2l0SHViIHdoaWNoIHdpbGwga2VlcCB0aGUgUlNBIHRleHQKCmZvciBlaXRoZXIg cmVzdG9yYXRpb24gaWYgbmVlZGVkIG9yIGZvciBhIG5ldyBkb2N1bWVudC4KCgoKSmltCgoKCgoK CgpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXwoKQ09TRSBt YWlsaW5nIGxpc3QKCkNPU0VAaWV0Zi5vcmcKCmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4v bGlzdGluZm8vY29zZQoKCgo= ----_com.android.email_13673800856330 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+PGhlYWQ+PG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVpdj0iQ29udGVudC1UeXBlIiBjb250ZW50PSJ0ZXh0 L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJzZXQ9VVRGLTgiPjwvaGVhZD48Ym9keT4KICAgIAo8ZGl2PihDaGFpcik8L2Rp dj48ZGl2Pjxicj48L2Rpdj48ZGl2PkNyeXB0byBhZ2lsaXR5IGlzIGtleSBoZXJlLiBXaGV0aGVy IHJzYSBmdW5jdGlvbmFsaXR5IGlzIGRlbGl2ZXJlZCBpbiB0aGUgY29yZSBkb2Mgb3IgaW4gYW4g ZXh0ZW5zaW9uIGlzIGEgc2ltcGxlIGRvY3VtZW50IG1hbmFnZW1lbnQgZGVjaXNpb24gYnkgdGhl IGdyb3VwLiBJIHRoaW5rIHdlJ3ZlIHNlZW4gZW5vdWdoIG9mIGEgY2FsbCB0byB0cnkgcHVsbGlu ZyBpdCBvdXQgYXMgSmltIGlzIGRvaW5nIGFuZCBwb3RlbnRpYWxseSBlbm91Z2ggdG8gc3RhcnQg dXAgYSBzZWNvbmQgZHJhZnQgdG8ga2VlcCBmdW5jdGlvbmFsaXR5LiBEb2VzIHRoYXQgbGluZSB1 cCB3aXRoIHdoYXQgb3RoZXJzIGFyZSBzZWVpbmc/IElmIHNvOiBBbnkgdm9sdW50ZWVycyB0byBl ZGl0IGFuIHJzYSBkcmFmdD8mbmJzcDs8L2Rpdj48ZGl2Pjxicj48L2Rpdj48ZGl2IGlkPSJjb21w b3Nlcl9zaWduYXR1cmUiPjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PVVURi04Ij48ZGl2PCBkaXY9IiI+PGRpdj48ZGl2Pi0tIEp1c3Rp bjwvZGl2PjxkaXY+PGJyPjwvZGl2PjxkaXY+LyBTZW50IGZyb20gbXkgcGhvbmUgLzwvZGl2Pjwv ZGl2PjxkaXY+PC9kaXY+PC9kaXY8PjwvZGl2Pjxicj48YnI+LS0tLS0tLS0gT3JpZ2luYWwgbWVz c2FnZSAtLS0tLS0tLTxicj5Gcm9tOiBDaHVjayBNb3J0aW1vcmUgJmx0O2Ntb3J0aW1vcmVAc2Fs ZXNmb3JjZS5jb20mZ3Q7IDxicj5EYXRlOiAxMC81LzIwMTUgIDI6NTYgQU0gIChHTVQrMDE6MDAp IDxicj5UbzogSmltIFNjaGFhZCAmbHQ7aWV0ZkBhdWd1c3RjZWxsYXJzLmNvbSZndDsgPGJyPkNj OiBjb3NlQGlldGYub3JnIDxicj5TdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogW0NPU0VdIFRoZSB1c2Ugb2YgUlNBIGFs Z29yaXRobXMgPGJyPjxicj48bWV0YSBodHRwLWVxdWl2PSJDb250ZW50LVR5cGUiIGNvbnRlbnQ9 InRleHQvaHRtbDsgY2hhcnNldD11dGYtOCI+PGRpdiBkaXI9Imx0ciI+SSdkIHN1cHBvcnQgbGVh dmluZyBzb21lIHN1cHBvcnQgZm9yIFJTQSBpbiBwbGFjZS4gJm5ic3A7ICJUaGluZyIgaXMgYSBw cmV0dHkgYnJvYWQgdGVybSwgYW5kIHdlIGV4cGVjdCB0byBiZSBkZWFsaW5nIHdpdGggYSBzcGVj dHJ1bSBvZiBjYXBhYmlsaXRpZXMgaW4gb3VyIHNlcnZpY2VzLjwvZGl2PjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9Imdt YWlsX2V4dHJhIj48YnI+PGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iZ21haWxfcXVvdGUiPk9uIFNhdCwgT2N0IDMsIDIw MTUgYXQgNjoyMSBQTSwgSmltIFNjaGFhZCA8c3BhbiBkaXI9Imx0ciI+Jmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1h aWx0bzppZXRmQGF1Z3VzdGNlbGxhcnMuY29tIiB0YXJnZXQ9Il9ibGFuayI+aWV0ZkBhdWd1c3Rj ZWxsYXJzLmNvbTwvYT4mZ3Q7PC9zcGFuPiB3cm90ZTo8YnI+PGJsb2NrcXVvdGUgY2xhc3M9Imdt YWlsX3F1b3RlIiBzdHlsZT0ibWFyZ2luOjAgMCAwIC44ZXg7Ym9yZGVyLWxlZnQ6MXB4ICNjY2Mg c29saWQ7cGFkZGluZy1sZWZ0OjFleCI+SSBhbSBpbnRlbmRpbmcgdG8gcmVtb3ZlIGFsbCBSU0Eg YWxnb3JpdGhtcyBmcm9tIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudC4mbmJzcDsgSXQgZG9lcyBub3Q8YnI+CnNlZW0g dGhhdCB0aGlzIGlzIGdvaW5nIHRvIGJlIHVzZWQgYnkgdGhlIElvVCB3b3JsZCBkdWUgdG8gc2l6 ZS4mbmJzcDsgSXQgZG9lczxicj4KbWVhbiB0aGF0IHRoZSBvbmx5IHNpZ25hdHVyZSBhbGdvcml0 aG1zIGxlZnQgYXJlIGdvaW5nIHRvIGJlIEVDIGFsZ29yaXRobXM8YnI+CndoaWNoIG1pZ2h0IGJl IGFuIElQUiBpc3N1ZSBidXQgUkZDIDYwOTAgaG9wZWZ1bGx5IGFkZHJlc3NlcyB0aGF0IHByb2Js ZW0uPGJyPgo8YnI+Ckkgd2lsbCBiZSBzdGFydGluZyBhIGxvY2FsIGRvY3VtZW50IG9uIEdpdEh1 YiB3aGljaCB3aWxsIGtlZXAgdGhlIFJTQSB0ZXh0PGJyPgpmb3IgZWl0aGVyIHJlc3RvcmF0aW9u IGlmIG5lZWRlZCBvciBmb3IgYSBuZXcgZG9jdW1lbnQuPGJyPgo8YnI+CkppbTxicj4KPGJyPgo8 YnI+Cjxicj4KX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX188 YnI+CkNPU0UgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0PGJyPgo8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86Q09TRUBpZXRmLm9yZyI+ Q09TRUBpZXRmLm9yZzwvYT48YnI+CjxhIGhyZWY9Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxt YW4vbGlzdGluZm8vY29zZSIgcmVsPSJub3JlZmVycmVyIiB0YXJnZXQ9Il9ibGFuayI+aHR0cHM6 Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9jb3NlPC9hPjxicj4KPC9ibG9ja3F1b3Rl PjwvZGl2Pjxicj48L2Rpdj4KPC9ib2R5PjwvaHRtbD4= ----_com.android.email_13673800856330-- From nobody Mon Oct 5 05:55:59 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E6051A1A78 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 05:55:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 jrDx4D_1ltvt for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 05:55:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qg0-x235.google.com (mail-qg0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::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 921211A1A7C for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 05:55:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qgx61 with SMTP id 61so148290797qgx.3 for ; Mon, 05 Oct 2015 05:55:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:mime-version:subject:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=wxSrlpT8YB38IF0PZuwQqAyvBu+csS/UZHOD1pJQhX8=; b=KWOneWNL2P5oiBKqOiYza5JfhJbF8+JjotC1apjWEUcpEV3kLN62F8NHF3gyDZmeJ/ GxMUmr+ihnkKqdtf2XwKoNy2WwxIOwgsntczeyerc4FplSVa/u66W9yZAE+LT71sRVwH cnajKZqy6KVBq74cSAbe8tc9pfNTJ6GDz89dwff5893YtKG0MykfHSP/B9q22+2903ip mMWGM+F200UGo8ZzhKc+A7XhDb1iEiYJu0wXL+vrZ2QhBnP0p+J1BarXKa5ZJQJBTv72 4lSbK7SpkwvDwc04KCbBXi37GDW8dOXdHMfeuoU+hWeuBqj/aiFKKIrf2g7JBVqAkkE/ 9zdg== X-Received: by 10.140.27.161 with SMTP id 30mr38599025qgx.4.1444049753722; Mon, 05 Oct 2015 05:55:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.3] (209-6-114-252.c3-0.arl-ubr1.sbo-arl.ma.cable.rcn.com. [209.6.114.252]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i21sm7564469qkh.48.2015.10.05.05.55.52 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 05 Oct 2015 05:55:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Kathleen Moriarty X-Google-Original-From: Kathleen Moriarty Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-7E5579EF-2C12-4954-8BA1-9CF9895252CD Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (12H143) In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 08:55:50 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <12718DFD-696F-40DE-AEA5-DA199B5A671A@gmail.com> References: To: Justin Richer Archived-At: Cc: Jim Schaad , Chuck Mortimore , "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] The use of RSA algorithms X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 12:55:57 -0000 --Apple-Mail-7E5579EF-2C12-4954-8BA1-9CF9895252CD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If the WG is going to support RSA, I like the idea of a separate draft and s= eparate implementation modules. Agility is important, but so is the ability= to deprecate algorithms and it could help to not promote ones that may need= to be deprecated sooner. Russ' IAB agility draft advocates for the registry approach that was used in= JOSE and shows trends for implementations. This has already been approved a= nd is in the RFC editor queue. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-iab-crypto-alg-agility/ Kathleen=20 Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 5, 2015, at 3:33 AM, Justin Richer wrote: >=20 > (Chair) >=20 > Crypto agility is key here. Whether rsa functionality is delivered in the c= ore doc or in an extension is a simple document management decision by the g= roup. I think we've seen enough of a call to try pulling it out as Jim is do= ing and potentially enough to start up a second draft to keep functionality.= Does that line up with what others are seeing? If so: Any volunteers to edi= t an rsa draft?=20 >=20 > -- Justin >=20 > / Sent from my phone / >=20 >=20 > -------- Original message -------- > From: Chuck Mortimore =20 > Date: 10/5/2015 2:56 AM (GMT+01:00)=20 > To: Jim Schaad =20 > Cc: cose@ietf.org=20 > Subject: Re: [COSE] The use of RSA algorithms=20 >=20 > I'd support leaving some support for RSA in place. "Thing" is a pretty b= road term, and we expect to be dealing with a spectrum of capabilities in ou= r services. >=20 >> On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Jim Schaad wrote= : >> I am intending to remove all RSA algorithms from the document. It does n= ot >> seem that this is going to be used by the IoT world due to size. It does= >> mean that the only signature algorithms left are going to be EC algorithm= s >> which might be an IPR issue but RFC 6090 hopefully addresses that problem= . >>=20 >> I will be starting a local document on GitHub which will keep the RSA tex= t >> for either restoration if needed or for a new document. >>=20 >> Jim >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> COSE mailing list >> COSE@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose >=20 > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose --Apple-Mail-7E5579EF-2C12-4954-8BA1-9CF9895252CD Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
If the WG= is going to support RSA, I like the idea of a separate draft and separate i= mplementation modules.  Agility is important, but so is the ability to d= eprecate algorithms and it could help to not promote ones that may need to b= e deprecated sooner.

Russ' IAB agility draft advoca= tes for the registry approach that was used in JOSE and shows trends for imp= lementations.  This has already been approved and is in the RFC editor q= ueue.


Kathleen 

Sent fro= m my iPhone

On Oct 5, 2015, at 3:33 AM, Justin Richer <jricher@mit.edu> wrote:

<= blockquote type=3D"cite">
=20
(Chair)

Crypto agility is key here. Whether rs= a functionality is delivered in the core doc or in an extension is a simple d= ocument management decision by the group. I think we've seen enough of a cal= l to try pulling it out as Jim is doing and potentially enough to start up a= second draft to keep functionality. Does that line up with what others are s= eeing? If so: Any volunteers to edit an rsa draft? 

-- Justin
/ Sent from my phone /

<= br>-------- Original message --------
From: Chuck Mortimore <cmortimore@salesforce.com>
Dat= e: 10/5/2015 2:56 AM (GMT+01:00)
To: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
Cc: cose@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [COSE] The use of RSA= algorithms

I'd support leaving some support for RSA in= place.   "Thing" is a pretty broad term, and we expect to be dealing w= ith a spectrum of capabilities in our services.

On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Jim Schaa= d <ietf@augustcellars.com> wrote:
I am intending to remove all RSA algorithms from the document.&nbs= p; It does not
seem that this is going to be used by the IoT world due to size.  It do= es
mean that the only signature algorithms left are going to be EC algorithms which might be an IPR issue but RFC 6090 hopefully addresses that problem.
I will be starting a local document on GitHub which will keep the RSA text for either restoration if needed or for a new document.

Jim



_______________________________________________
COSE mailing list
COSE@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose

____________________= ___________________________
COSE mailing list
COSE@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman= /listinfo/cose
= --Apple-Mail-7E5579EF-2C12-4954-8BA1-9CF9895252CD-- From nobody Mon Oct 5 12:34:12 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBD801B3DD7 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:34:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 8SL5OpKgxyXA for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:34:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp4.pacifier.net (smtp4.pacifier.net [64.255.237.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B5FF51AD368 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:34:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (173-8-216-38-Oregon.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.8.216.38]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp4.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EE8A038EF3; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:34:07 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: "'Samuel Erdtman'" , "'Chuck Mortimore'" References: <01c501d0fe42$fe257a30$fa706e90$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:31:35 -0700 Message-ID: <030601d0ffa4$733cfac0$59b6f040$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0307_01D0FF69.C6DF3430" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQFTjRVhXBUAyxbkqipUhKZBXnmnCwKEhS23AcIe6kSfNfkwgA== Archived-At: Cc: 'cose' Subject: Re: [COSE] The use of RSA algorithms X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2015 19:34:11 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0307_01D0FF69.C6DF3430 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable For the people who are arguing that it needs to be in the core document. =20 Are you going to feel the same way if we keep the current position that = no RSA v1.5 is supported? I think that this really drastically cuts = into the argument that it is used a lot. V1.5 signatures and key = transport is used a lot. RSA with PSS and OAEP are not used a lot. =20 Jim =20 =20 From: Samuel Erdtman [mailto:samuel@erdtman.se]=20 Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2015 10:10 PM To: Chuck Mortimore Cc: Jim Schaad ; cose Subject: Re: [COSE] The use of RSA algorithms =20 +1 =20 Best Regards Samuel Erdtman =20 On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 2:56 AM, Chuck Mortimore = > wrote: I'd support leaving some support for RSA in place. "Thing" is a pretty = broad term, and we expect to be dealing with a spectrum of capabilities = in our services. =20 On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Jim Schaad > wrote: I am intending to remove all RSA algorithms from the document. It does = not seem that this is going to be used by the IoT world due to size. It = does mean that the only signature algorithms left are going to be EC = algorithms which might be an IPR issue but RFC 6090 hopefully addresses that = problem. I will be starting a local document on GitHub which will keep the RSA = text for either restoration if needed or for a new document. Jim _______________________________________________ COSE mailing list COSE@ietf.org =20 https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose =20 _______________________________________________ COSE mailing list COSE@ietf.org =20 https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0307_01D0FF69.C6DF3430 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

For the people who are arguing that it needs to be in the core = document.

 

Are you going to feel the same way if we keep the current position that = no RSA v1.5 is supported?=C2=A0 I think that this really drastically = cuts into the argument that it is used a lot.=C2=A0 V1.5 signatures and = key transport is used a lot.=C2=A0 RSA with PSS and OAEP are not used a = lot.

 

Jim

 

 

From:<= /b> = Samuel Erdtman [mailto:samuel@erdtman.se]
Sent: Sunday, = October 04, 2015 10:10 PM
To: Chuck Mortimore = <cmortimore@salesforce.com>
Cc: Jim Schaad = <ietf@augustcellars.com>; cose = <cose@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [COSE] The use of RSA = algorithms

 

+1

 

Best Regards

Samuel Erdtman

 

On Mon, = Oct 5, 2015 at 2:56 AM, Chuck Mortimore <cmortimore@salesforce.com> = wrote:

I'd = support leaving some support for RSA in place.   "Thing" = is a pretty broad term, and we expect to be dealing with a spectrum of = capabilities in our services.

 

On Sat, = Oct 3, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> = wrote:

I am = intending to remove all RSA algorithms from the document.  It does = not
seem that this is going to be used by the IoT world due to = size.  It does
mean that the only signature algorithms left are = going to be EC algorithms
which might be an IPR issue but RFC 6090 = hopefully addresses that problem.

I will be starting a local = document on GitHub which will keep the RSA text
for either = restoration if needed or for a new = document.

Jim



_____________________________________= __________
COSE mailing list
COSE@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose

 


______________________________________= _________
COSE mailing list
COSE@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose

 

------=_NextPart_000_0307_01D0FF69.C6DF3430-- From nobody Mon Oct 5 17:05:18 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EA2E1B518D for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 17:05:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.8 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 sJgyf3jHNIcR for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 17:05:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp4.pacifier.net (smtp4.pacifier.net [64.255.237.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2490A1B5179 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 17:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (winery.augustcellars.com [206.212.239.129]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp4.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 667B438F33 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 17:05:12 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 17:02:39 -0700 Message-ID: <032601d0ffca$511a7730$f34f6590$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AdD/pNec3tvsr0ivSVSSKK1T1NZpPQ== Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] Getting rid of Message Type field X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 00:05:16 -0000 Carsten has several times stated that he wants to get rid of the message type field in the current document. I don't know that this is a viable idea, but I do want to explore the options at this point. Problem Statement: It is not always possible to determine from context which if the different COSE message structures is being used at any given point. The message type field exists to allow for a fixed determination in all instances. The issue is that one is wasting space in those cases where it is definitely known which structure is being used. One also needs to keep in mind that structures may be moved from locations where the type can be determined to locations where the type cannot be determined. Argument #1 - Jim is wrong and the message type can always be inferred from context. I don't think anyone is going to make this argument, but if they do this is where it goes. Various Alternatives: 1. Leave things alone: There is a one byte penalty per message to have the field. Always having it means there is never any choice about if it exists and where it exists. 2. Move it to a CBOR tag: This starts out as being the same size as the current system. Making it optional makes it easy to tag for those cases where it can be implicit. The biggest issue is that this consumes potentially precious CBOR tag number space to stay in the single digits. If it is a separate field as present, there are 24 unsigned integers (and potentially can go to unsigned integers) to have a good number of both structures and versions of structures identified. The number of CBOR tag numbers in the single bytes is limited as a number are already assigned. Doing this makes the current request for a COSE tag obsolete. 3. Make it a header parameter: This will grow the size of the message by one when the message type is present. It has the nicety that the message type can be protected (may want to think about protecting it in any event), but it makes it harder to do a simple check of what the message type is You need to do a map lookup and potentially a second CBOR decode and a map lookup to find what the message type is. 4. Make the message type optional: It is easy from a typing point of view to determine if the message type is present or not. It is an integer and the next item is always going to be a binary value. It complicates the code slightly, in some cases the code indexes the array starting at zero and in other cases it starts at one to look for fields other than the message type. (Either that or it just inserts a message type to make life easier.) 5. An option Jim has not thought of (or rejected): Fill in if you come up with something. Jim From nobody Mon Oct 5 17:41:20 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B629F1A8940 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 17:41:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.549 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] autolearn=no 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 ub5JDvrVB2Mb for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 17:41:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 3E5CA1A8942 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2015 17:41:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.201.11]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t960fB6n019108; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 02:41:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nar.local (p5DC7F6AE.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.199.246.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nVKjM0F2bz4q7V; Tue, 6 Oct 2015 02:41:10 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 02:41:10 +0200 From: Carsten Bormann To: Jim Schaad , cose@ietf.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <032601d0ffca$511a7730$f34f6590$@augustcellars.com> References: <032601d0ffca$511a7730$f34f6590$@augustcellars.com> X-Mailer: Airmail (329) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="561318a6_21bdff82_808e" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [COSE] Getting rid of Message Type field X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 00:41:19 -0000 --561318a6_21bdff82_808e Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline The message-type field as it is, is useful if you do know that you are lo= oking at a COSE structure, you just don=E2=80=99t know which one. That situation is certainly possible, but it doesn=E2=80=99t strike me as= particularly likely or the one we should design for. A CBOR tag would be a globally unique identifier. =C2=A0(You still would = need to know you are looking at CBOR, but the initial bytes representing = the tag actually creates a bit of a signature =E2=80=94 in that other mea= ning of the word, also known as magic number.) I would go for tags in the space between 24 and 127; this requires two by= tes, but there are enough of these to allocate three of them for COSE, an= d the two-byte signature is more unique. (Looking at the bytes again: by removing msg-type, we save one byte in th= e case that I would call the usual case, and spend two instead of one in = the case where we have little context, but we gain a bit more of the sign= ature effect in the latter case.) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten --561318a6_21bdff82_808e Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline

There has been no further discussion on this = topic.

 

Carsten has proposed that we adopt a solution to = =E2=80=9Cremoving=E2=80=9D the message type field from the current = structures.=C2=A0=C2=A0 His argument basically includes the statement = =C2=A0that, on average, the message type will be known from context at = least 51% of the time in those cases where message size is a strong = consideration.=C2=A0 For this reason going with a two byte prefix for = identify the message type where not already unknown is = acceptable.

 

I do not believe that we have any data either to support or refute this = statement.=C2=A0

 

My current intention is to implement this change in the document, along = with the change to validate the message type as part of the = cryptographic handling.=C2=A0 Are there = objections?

 

Jim

 

 

From:<= /b> = Carsten Bormann [mailto:cabo@tzi.org]
Sent: Monday, October = 05, 2015 5:41 PM
To: Jim Schaad = <ietf@augustcellars.com>; cose@ietf.org
Subject: Re: = [COSE] Getting rid of Message Type = field

 

The = message-type field as it is, is useful if you do know that you are = looking at a COSE structure, you just don=E2=80=99t know which = one.

That = situation is certainly possible, but it doesn=E2=80=99t strike me as = particularly likely or the one we should design = for.

 =

A CBOR tag = would be a globally unique identifier.  (You still would need to = know you are looking at CBOR, but the initial bytes representing the tag = actually creates a bit of a signature =E2=80=94 in that other meaning of = the word, also known as magic = number.)

 =

I would go = for tags in the space between 24 and 127; this requires two bytes, but = there are enough of these to allocate three of them for COSE, and the = two-byte signature is more unique.

 =

(Looking = at the bytes again: by removing msg-type, we save one byte in the case = that I would call the usual case, and spend two instead of one in the = case where we have little context, but we gain a bit more of the = signature effect in the latter case.)

 =

Gr=C3=BC=C3= =9Fe, Carsten

 =

------=_NextPart_000_07DB_01D10295.E15AEC30-- From nobody Fri Oct 9 13:45:09 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A6E21AC418 for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 13:45:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no 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 OR07XZrkMzR5 for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 13:45:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp3.pacifier.net (smtp3.pacifier.net [64.255.237.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B24501A1B65 for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 13:45:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (173-8-216-38-Oregon.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.8.216.38]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp3.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EBC2C38F01; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 13:45:03 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: =?UTF-8?Q?'G=C3=B6ran_Selander'?= , "'Hannes Tschofenig'" References: <560CE792.9080807@gmx.net> <3BDD6486-150D-4D9B-8C16-A920AA9806A4@ericsson.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 13:42:28 -0700 Message-ID: <07df01d102d3$03c40cb0$0b4c2610$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQLqcbdmhAv56FCT904Qt1Hf27XFjwLkrBsYAXVeGcUBb3mLXpwCdDiQ Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Replay Protection X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 20:45:07 -0000 When we are saying that we want to do "replay detection", exactly what = are we talking about?=20 1. I want to detect if this is the same as the last (n) message(s) that = I processed. 2. I want to detect if this message was "sent" before the last message = I processed. 3. Some message of both - please expand. 4. Something entirely different. Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: COSE [mailto:cose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of G=C3=B6ran = Selander > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2015 12:21 AM > To: Mike Jones ; Hannes Tschofenig > > Cc: cose@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [COSE] Replay Protection >=20 >=20 > On 2015-10-04 20:13, "Mike Jones" wrote: >=20 > >The fact that we're even having a discussion about what the best > >content for the sequence number/timestamp is means that there are > >multiple good choices and that applications will want to use the = choice > >appropriate to the application's needs. That's why this information > >should be part of the application payload - not part of the = cryptographic > wrapper. >=20 > So far when we discussed replay protection for the most constrained = devices no > one has disagreed with sequence number being a good measure in = general. I=E2=80=99m > thinking of devices which sleep almost always to save energy and where = storing > and searching through large amounts of nonces is not an option. As an > additional benefit a counter starting from 0 encoded in CBOR incurs = most of the > time less transmission overhead than a nonce or a timestamp would do. >=20 > There are cases where synchronised time is available and where you = could > potentially use integrity protected timestamp for other things than = just replay > protection, like in the 6tisch setting. But as far as I understand = there is also a > concern about message size and just for replay protection sequence = numbers > could be appropriate in that case too. >=20 > So the claim is not that you MUST use sequence numbers, but that in = cases > where an optimized format is most needed is where the use of sequence > numbers is the most feasible method for replay protection. >=20 > I would be happy to stand corrected here to learn when this assumption = is > wrong. >=20 > If not, whether this would go into the message specification or become = a "COSE > profile=E2=80=9D of some sort is another question. >=20 >=20 >=20 > G=C3=B6ran >=20 >=20 > > > >I think part of why this is coming up is that we don't have a CBOR = spec > >for defining standard application payload content elements like we = did > >for JOSE. For JOSE, the cryptographic content is defined in JWS, = JWE, > >JWK, and JWA [RFCs 7515-7518]. Whereas, standard application content > >appropriate for some contexts was defined by the JSON Web Token spec > >[RFC 7519]. There isn't an equivalent to JWT for CBOR at present. I > >think that's behind part of the urge to jam things into the COSE > >headers - since we haven't defined a right place to put them in the > >application payload. > > > > My 2=C2=A2 worth=E2=80=A6 > > -- Mike > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: COSE [mailto:cose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of G=C3=B6ran = Selander > >Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2015 1:46 AM > >To: Hannes Tschofenig > >Cc: cose@ietf.org > >Subject: Re: [COSE] Replay Protection > > > > > > > >> On 1 okt. 2015, at 09:59, Hannes Tschofenig > >> > >>wrote: > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> currently there are no fields that help with reply protection in = the > >> COSE specification (although in practice with other protocols the > >> nonce will be re-purposed as a sequence number field). > >> > >> I was wondering whether others in the group thought it would be > >> useful to add a sequence number and a timestamp field to the header > >> parameter registry for those applications that do not want to use = the > >> externally supplied data capability for providing replay = protection. > > > >I think there should be a compact way of representing at least = sequence > >numbers. Considering the various candidates I would say that nonces = and > >timestamp are of less general applicability for the most constrained > >settings, which is where the need for a very compact message matters. > > > >G=C3=B6ran > > > >> > >> Ciao > >> Hannes > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> COSE mailing list > >> COSE@ietf.org > >> = https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3a%2f%2fwww. > >> i > >> > = etf.org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fcose&data=3D01%7c01%7cMichael.Jones%40mi > >> c > >> > rosoft.com%7ce6e977e21bdb46388edb08d2cc983ef2%7c72f988bf86f141af91a > b2 > >> d > 7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=3DbUvJjpCSj4sEaxiL86yq88eekIh9wyKzEKZSd7PGLEo%3d >=20 > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose From nobody Fri Oct 9 14:20:09 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFD331B4CDF for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 14:20:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no 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 edumfo7KAEto for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 14:20:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 55FBD1B4CDD for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 14:20:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::b]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t99LJxRC011628; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 23:19:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nar.local (p5DC7F6AE.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.199.246.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nXj3M5fS7z4p9x; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 23:19:59 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <56182F7E.8020902@tzi.org> Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 23:19:58 +0200 From: Carsten Bormann User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.5 (Macintosh/20150923) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jim Schaad References: <032601d0ffca$511a7730$f34f6590$@augustcellars.com> <07da01d102d0$8db72c20$a9258460$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: <07da01d102d0$8db72c20$a9258460$@augustcellars.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Getting rid of Message Type field X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 21:20:08 -0000 Jim Schaad wrote: > My current intention is to implement this change in the document, along > with the change to validate the message type as part of the > cryptographic handling. I didn't say that in my original missive, but the latter one obviously is important. What's the general approach we'll use for mixing in extra information (that is not in the protected-header) into the signing input? Unless we are very careful, we'll run into canonicalization issues. Grüße, Carsten From nobody Fri Oct 9 23:14:30 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4CDA1B2F5B for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 23:14:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 PlD7VdgqPLox for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 23:14:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-6.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-6.mit.edu [18.7.68.35]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A87BF1B2EA8 for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 23:14:26 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 12074423-f793f6d000007fc1-2e-5618acc1f6a8 Received: from mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu ( [18.7.62.39]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-6.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 4E.4A.32705.1CCA8165; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 02:14:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id t9A6EOQp020488 for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 02:14:25 -0400 Received: from [192.168.2.19] (62-243-175-217-dynamic.dk.customer.tdc.net [62.243.175.217]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as jricher@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id t9A6ELXn010199 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 02:14:23 -0400 From: Justin Richer Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C33D3CBD-E3AB-4D9E-8119-83BE216E6CC1" Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 08:14:20 +0200 References: <20151010012851.29540.19070.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: cose@ietf.org Message-Id: <12ECF12B-6EDC-4A3F-80F1-A05FC1808FB7@mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrLIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixG6nrntwjUSYwYfdghbTtk5ldWD0WLLk J1MAYxSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXRu+7Z4wFKwwrPt0/zN7AuFO7i5GTQ0LARKL79At2CFtM4sK9 9WwgtpDAYiaJtkcGXYxcQPZRRolrt0+wQjhvmCTe/p0J1sEmoCoxfU0LE4jNLJAgcbHzDSOI LSzgKnH7eQdYDQtQzbVLm1ggpjpK7P8/GyjOwSEiIChxt9McJMwrYCVx7dhXdghbT+LVrcus EAfJSuz+/YhpAiPfLCQbZiEpg4hrSyxb+JoZwtaU2N+9nAVTXEOi89tE1gWMbKsYZVNyq3Rz EzNzilOTdYuTE/PyUot0zfRyM0v0UlNKNzGCQ9VFeQfjn4NKhxgFOBiVeHg/uEmECbEmlhVX 5h5ilORgUhLl3bcKKMSXlJ9SmZFYnBFfVJqTWnyIUYKDWUmE96kuUI43JbGyKrUoHyYlzcGi JM676QdfiJBAemJJanZqakFqEUxWhoNDSYJXdjVQo2BRanpqRVpmTglCmomDE2Q4D9BwHZAa 3uKCxNzizHSI/ClGRSlxXiOQhABIIqM0D64XlErsPq+/+YpRHOgVYd5qkCoeYBqC634FNJgJ aHAOvxjI4JJEhJRUA2PQx62HK65dvHpEe53YljqG+GM1ect2TDo6S6PIuFGxxjya9Wa05cv2 ju8nql4k35E5d+6/4AQnDfbinbKN26+15MnWzvprM/XEVYmEp+aftT+12LLdM9pkGzDrMRPD /K6prZcNeW+uDTHNm8r2024a7/8gk50sxkYqZ1Z8uazBcGJlgbgt30UlluKMREMt5qLiRACf AdHYAAMAAA== Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] Fwd: cose - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 94 X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 06:14:28 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_C33D3CBD-E3AB-4D9E-8119-83BE216E6CC1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 FYI, we have a meeting room in Yokohama, details are below. =E2=80=94 Justin > Begin forwarded message: >=20 > From: "\"IETF Secretariat\"" > Subject: cose - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 94 > Date: October 10, 2015 at 3:28:51 AM GMT+2 > To: > Cc: , , = >=20 > Dear Kepeng Li, >=20 > The session(s) that you have requested have been scheduled. > Below is the scheduled session information followed by > the original request.=20 >=20 > cose Session 1 (1:30:00) > Tuesday, Afternoon Session II 1520-1650 > Room Name: Room 413 size: 80 > --------------------------------------------- >=20 >=20 >=20 > Request Information: >=20 >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------- > Working Group Name: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption > Area Name: Security Area > Session Requester: Kepeng Li >=20 > Number of Sessions: 1 > Length of Session(s): 1.5 Hours > Number of Attendees: 50 > Conflicts to Avoid:=20 > First Priority: abfab sacm radext dime tls ace core oauth jose > Second Priority: dane httpauth kitten dice saag > Third Priority: httpbis sidr >=20 >=20 > Special Requests: >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------- >=20 --Apple-Mail=_C33D3CBD-E3AB-4D9E-8119-83BE216E6CC1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 FYI, we have a meeting room in Yokohama, details are = below.

 =E2=80=94= Justin

Begin forwarded message:

From: = "\"IETF Secretariat\"" <agenda@ietf.org>
Subject: = cose - Requested = session has been scheduled for IETF 94
Date: = October 10, 2015 at 3:28:51 AM = GMT+2
To: = <kepeng.lkp@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: = <cose-ads@ietf.org>, = <jricher@mit.edu>,= <kepeng.lkp@alibaba-inc.com>

Dear Kepeng = Li,

The session(s) that you have requested = have been scheduled.
Below is the scheduled session = information followed by
the original request.

cose Session 1 (1:30:00)
=    Tuesday, Afternoon Session II 1520-1650
=    Room Name: Room 413 size: 80
=    ---------------------------------------------



Request = Information:


---------------------------------------------------------
Working Group Name: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption
Area Name: Security Area
Session Requester: = Kepeng Li

Number of Sessions: 1
Length of Session(s):  1.5 Hours
Number of = Attendees: 50
Conflicts to Avoid:
First = Priority: abfab sacm radext dime tls ace core oauth jose
= Second Priority: dane httpauth kitten dice saag
Third = Priority: httpbis sidr


Special= Requests:

---------------------------------------------------------


= --Apple-Mail=_C33D3CBD-E3AB-4D9E-8119-83BE216E6CC1-- From nobody Sat Oct 10 05:05:56 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 926E41B35B3; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 05:05:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no 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 3Gq1ze7KfmkN; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 05:05:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 19AD81B35B0; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 05:05:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::b]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t9AC5kGi021260; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 14:05:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nar.local (p5DC7F6AE.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.199.246.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nY4jQ0ytlz4pK3; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 14:05:46 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5618FF18.8050909@tzi.org> Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 14:05:44 +0200 From: Carsten Bormann User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.5 (Macintosh/20150923) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dtls-iot@ietf.org, core@ietf.org, ace@ietf.org, cose@ietf.org, t2trg@irtf.org X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] Constrained Node/Network Cluster @ IETF94, "final" version X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 12:05:51 -0000 Below is the "final" version of my usual eclectic condensed agenda. (Sorry for missing out on the draft version, but not much has changed.) Again, I have filled in the T2TRG Sat/Sun meeting, which is waiting for its room assignment; the T2TRG summary meeting this time is on Wed morning (and we have 1 h, which should be enough for a summary). Remember that there is still some potential for changes. All times are JST (UTC+0900) (the browser timezone function is not yet reinstated on https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/agenda-utc, for those who want to listen from remote). Grüße, Carsten SATURDAY, October 31, 2015 0900-1830 T2TRG - Room TBD 0900-2100 IETF Hackathon - Room 315 0900-1830 RAIM Workshop - Room 303 SUNDAY, November 1, 2015 0900-1600 T2TRG - Room TBD 0900-1800 IETF Hackathon - Room 315 1600-1700 Newcomers' Meet and Greet (open to Newcomers, WG chairs and Mentors only) - InterContinental Bay View Room 1600-1630 CBOR - Room 301 1700-1900 Welcome Reception - InterContinental Ballroom MONDAY, November 2, 2015 0900-1130 Morning Session I Rm 501 OPS v6ops IPv6 Operations WG Rm 301 RTG detnet Deterministic Networking WG Rm 302 SEC *** ace Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments WG 1300-1500 Afternoon Session I Rm 501 ART httpbis Hypertext Transfer Protocol WG Rm 304 OPS anima Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach WG Rm 303 TSV tsvwg Transport Area Working Group WG 1520-1650 Afternoon Session II Rm 302 INT dnssd Extensions for Scalable DNS Service Discovery WG Rm 501 TSV rmcat RTP Media Congestion Avoidance Techniques WG 1710-1910 Afternoon Session III Rm 502 OPS v6ops IPv6 Operations WG Rm 501 RTG rtgarea Routing Area Open Meeting Rm 302 SEC tokbind Token Binding WG TUESDAY, November 3, 2015 0900-1130 Morning Session I Rm 301 ART *** core Constrained RESTful Environments WG Rm 502 INT homenet Home Networking WG 1300-1500 Afternoon Session I 411/412 ART webpush Web-Based Push Notifications WG 1520-1650 Afternoon Session II Rm 303 OPS anima Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach WG Rm 413 SEC *** cose CBOR Object Signing and Encryption WG Rm 304 TSV taps Transport Services WG 1710-1840 Afternoon Session III 411/412 SEC openpgp Open Specification for Pretty Good Privacy WG WEDNESDAY, November 4, 2015 0900-1130 Morning Session I Rm 501 INT 6man IPv6 Maintenance WG Rm 302 IRTF*** t2trg Proposed Thing-to-Thing Research Group - 1030 - 1130 Rm 303 SEC tls Transport Layer Security WG 1300-1500 Afternoon Session I Rm 501 TSV tcpinc TCP Increased Security WG THURSDAY, November 5, 2015 0900-1130 Morning Session I Rm 303 ART ice Interactive Connectivity Establishment WG Rm 501 INT *** 6lo IPv6 over Networks of Resource-constrained Nodes WG 1300-1500 Afternoon Session I Rm 413 ART geojson Geographic JSON WG Rm 502 SEC saag Security Area Open Meeting Rm 302 TSV tsvwg Transport Area Working Group WG 1520-1720 Afternoon Session II Rm 303 INT *** 6tisch IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e WG Rm 501 OPS opsarea Operations & Management Area Open Meeting - Combined with OPSAWG Rm 301 SEC oauth Web Authorization Protocol WG 1740-1840 Afternoon Session III Rm 304 INT intarea Internet Area Working Group WG Rm 302 RTG *** roll Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks WG Rm 501 SEC tls Transport Layer Security WG FRIDAY, November 6, 2015 0900-1130 Morning Session I Rm 302 ART *** core Constrained RESTful Environments WG 411/412 RTG bier Bit Indexed Explicit Replication WG Rm 304 SEC acme Automated Certificate Management Environment WG Rm 501 TSV rmcat RTP Media Congestion Avoidance Techniques WG All day ETSI 6lo Plugtest SATURDAY, November 7, 2015 All day ETSI 6lo Plugtest SUNDAY, November 8, 2015 All day ETSI 6lo Plugtest From nobody Sat Oct 10 13:32:32 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74C951B47DA for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 13:32:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 mHL52Q07iBfi for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 13:32:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp2.pacifier.net (smtp2.pacifier.net [64.255.237.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 600C21B47D8 for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 13:32:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (173-8-216-38-Oregon.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.8.216.38]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp2.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C2B072C9B7; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 13:32:28 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: "'Carsten Bormann'" References: <032601d0ffca$511a7730$f34f6590$@augustcellars.com> <07da01d102d0$8db72c20$a9258460$@augustcellars.com> <56182F7E.8020902@tzi.org> In-Reply-To: <56182F7E.8020902@tzi.org> Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 13:29:53 -0700 Message-ID: <08b101d1039a$6bff5ec0$43fe1c40$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQHgliybruLzlDA4sTqFQaM5SsfVRgIKsZdmAamS6nsCal+LRZ4VExDA Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Getting rid of Message Type field X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 20:32:30 -0000 How externally supplied data is to be integrated into the validation = process is currently documented. Please let me know if you find it a = problem. The canonicalization issue is punted to the application. Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: Carsten Bormann [mailto:cabo@tzi.org] > Sent: Friday, October 09, 2015 2:20 PM > To: Jim Schaad > Cc: cose@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [COSE] Getting rid of Message Type field >=20 > Jim Schaad wrote: > > My current intention is to implement this change in the document, > > along with the change to validate the message type as part of the > > cryptographic handling. >=20 > I didn't say that in my original missive, but the latter one obviously = is important. > What's the general approach we'll use for mixing in extra information = (that is > not in the protected-header) into the signing input? > Unless we are very careful, we'll run into canonicalization issues. >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Sat Oct 10 13:41:32 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C15601B4840 for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 13:41:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no 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 nTjDEa0d-ejs for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 13:41:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 25B2E1B483F for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 13:41:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.201.11]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t9AKfMC6008587; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 22:41:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nar.local (p5DC7F6AE.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.199.246.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nYJ8L0M6Pz4pP4; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 22:41:21 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <561977F0.8090904@tzi.org> Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 22:41:20 +0200 From: Carsten Bormann User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.5 (Macintosh/20150923) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jim Schaad References: <032601d0ffca$511a7730$f34f6590$@augustcellars.com> <07da01d102d0$8db72c20$a9258460$@augustcellars.com> <56182F7E.8020902@tzi.org> <08b101d1039a$6bff5ec0$43fe1c40$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: <08b101d1039a$6bff5ec0$43fe1c40$@augustcellars.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Getting rid of Message Type field X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 20:41:30 -0000 Jim Schaad wrote: > How externally supplied data is to be integrated into the validation process is currently documented. Please let me know if you find it a problem. The canonicalization issue is punted to the application. No problem with that, but here we are talking about our own data (a message type, even if implicit). Grüße, Carsten From nobody Sat Oct 10 18:54:25 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D90391ACD0C for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 18:54:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 sKYb28NevNQQ for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 18:54:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp4.pacifier.net (smtp4.pacifier.net [64.255.237.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6C961ACD0B for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 18:54:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (winery.augustcellars.com [206.212.239.129]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp4.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 52CEE39077 for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 18:54:22 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 18:51:47 -0700 Message-ID: <08ea01d103c7$63d7fe50$2b87faf0$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AdEDxxrRZFI+AzDgTj+HhgFUUJN5iA== Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] Use of bignum in cbor encoding X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 01:54:24 -0000 There is a CBOR type of bignum which appears to have been designed to have big integers placed it in. Are there any objections to changing from using the binary string (bstr) to big number (bignum) in those locations? My understanding of the document is that the length of the resulting encoding is going to be the same. Jim From nobody Sat Oct 10 19:00:30 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8D451ACD22 for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 19:00:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 W7x2e_CBAsGE for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 19:00:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp3.pacifier.net (smtp3.pacifier.net [64.255.237.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CEB881ACD17 for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 19:00:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (winery.augustcellars.com [206.212.239.129]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp3.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3449638F7B for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2015 19:00:28 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 18:57:53 -0700 Message-ID: <08eb01d103c8$3deade00$b9c09a00$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AdEDx+JAGCXUcsKYTrqq/6joYic68A== Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] Assigning CBOR tags to key structures X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 02:00:29 -0000 I am currently working on the IANA text for doing assignment of CBOR tags in COSE. There is a possibility to request tags for the KEY and KEY_SET maps in the document. At the present time I have not done this. Can anybody see a reason for asking for tags on these two elements other than completeness? I.e. does anybody have a place where it would make sense to use the pre-defined tags rather than knowing either a key or key set is in this location (it is possible to distinguish between the two items based on the an array vs map tag.) Jim From nobody Sun Oct 11 02:28:38 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 752191A8718 for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 02:28:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.15 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.15 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no 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 EfEtDLIqZsnH for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 02:28:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 B2C041A8029 for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 02:28:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.201.11]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t9B9STkD015230; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:28:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nar.local (p5DC7F6AE.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.199.246.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nYd9S6h03z4p7n; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:28:28 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <561A2BBB.4040106@tzi.org> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:28:27 +0200 From: Carsten Bormann User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.5 (Macintosh/20150923) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jim Schaad References: <08ea01d103c7$63d7fe50$2b87faf0$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: <08ea01d103c7$63d7fe50$2b87faf0$@augustcellars.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Use of bignum in cbor encoding X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 09:28:37 -0000 > There is a CBOR type of bignum which appears to have been designed to have > big integers placed it in. Are there any objections to changing from using > the binary string (bstr) to big number (bignum) in those locations? My > understanding of the document is that the length of the resulting encoding > is going to be the same. Good question. CBOR has bignums so there is a common convention for representing integers that don't fit in 64 bits. At the data model level, a bignum is a sign (which is encoded into the tag) and the byte string that represents that number in binary. The expectation is that environments that can represent such numbers in a natural way will decode bignums right in the generic CBOR decoder, so the application will simply see an integer; more constrained applications will see the tag and the byte string. That a specific place really holds an integer may be clear from the context, so it may not be necessary to tag the byte string representing that integer as a bignum*). If a large integer is represented as a byte string without a tag, you lose the automatic decoding in the less constrained environments. You also lose the sign bit. So, if you have that context, the tag costs you 8 bits if the integer really is unsigned, 7 bits if you would have encoded the sign efficiently in the byte string (e.g., using two's complement), and possibly nothing at all if your sign representation is less efficient (or causes expansion of the byte string by one byte). Jim: I think you are looking at the places marked CREF14 and CREF15 in -05. For ECC, while it is certainly possible to specify that leading zero bytes are not to be removed, forcing bignums to do that here would lose the benefit from using a generic encoder (which would very likely remove those leading zeroes). For RSA, it would be natural to use bignums, or if that byte is really too much, possibly just exactly the byte string encoding from bignums without the tag. Grüße, Carsten *) (Conversely, the tag *is* the natural way to represent a choice in a place where the information model has a choice between a possibly large integer and a byte string.) From nobody Sun Oct 11 02:32:20 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B3A81A6EEC for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 02:32:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no 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 TOEltCOKmy5O for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 02:32:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (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 E29231A6EE4 for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 02:32:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::b]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t9B9WCjE025791; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:32:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nar.local (p5DC7F6AE.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.199.246.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nYdFm5fZgz4p9X; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:32:12 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <561A2C9B.5060104@tzi.org> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:32:11 +0200 From: Carsten Bormann User-Agent: Postbox 4.0.5 (Macintosh/20150923) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jim Schaad References: <08eb01d103c8$3deade00$b9c09a00$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: <08eb01d103c8$3deade00$b9c09a00$@augustcellars.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Assigning CBOR tags to key structures X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 09:32:19 -0000 I'd propose this rule: If there is a media type, there should be a CBOR tag for those environments that don't benefit from media types. (And generally vice versa, unless we are using CBOR tags in other than top-level positions.) Grüße, Carsten Jim Schaad wrote: > I am currently working on the IANA text for doing assignment of CBOR tags in > COSE. > > There is a possibility to request tags for the KEY and KEY_SET maps in the > document. At the present time I have not done this. Can anybody see a > reason for asking for tags on these two elements other than completeness? > I.e. does anybody have a place where it would make sense to use the > pre-defined tags rather than knowing either a key or key set is in this > location (it is possible to distinguish between the two items based on the > an array vs map tag.) > > > Jim > > > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose > From nobody Sun Oct 11 11:16:09 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B9CB1B2C37 for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:16:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 fFkws1OBUnen for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:16:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0101.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.101]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C6DD1B2C21 for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:16:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=sLH2KCBIvEqiDkQaxiKZjH21v6L72gl5+UbJAVg4/MM=; b=J90ZAYesSCqI+N1/N23COa3BAv7/7bcXZDp1+HqyqLJgKzaya030wvklXthSxtrM+m0BfE0XqrPDqhVevzUlNToUKa8dLfdUE7HC0cr0254OLW8fj1hOE41+M8GIIoaUqGmW2qWxRykLN3DIlb88mJt86QWogVvWgcWck8+EwNk= Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.145) by BY2PR03MB444.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.154) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.293.16; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 18:15:58 +0000 Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) by BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) with mapi id 15.01.0293.007; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 18:15:39 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: Carsten Bormann , Jim Schaad Thread-Topic: [COSE] Assigning CBOR tags to key structures Thread-Index: AdEDx+JAGCXUcsKYTrqq/6joYic68AAP9I+AABJICtA= Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 18:15:38 +0000 Message-ID: References: <08eb01d103c8$3deade00$b9c09a00$@augustcellars.com>, <561A2C9B.5060104@tzi.org> In-Reply-To: <561A2C9B.5060104@tzi.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; x-originating-ip: [166.176.186.41] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR03MB444; 5:0qwoR5aQa6S/3gy0fPMPxmGqO+0EXvm4CMAG+eLRd5lnpeRoJlE+A+F2roxD590d9xa3ZuYk+qkaIRSSTyZ1LlnX3C66uI2syiQKuzJmgm0mcYU+3q2NGWQn0KSzmAzElYVVhS6+PGWfr67E0VfoaA==; 24:2qHpMFaxLFb94VadBf9peOTGmJIg6E6dbmjDfbiV5rOug0feCJpcaszRk+tsYPOowpj4AV1vvAI0N/VAX09Xu3fXQks8M9DIJsjvESfAXJM=; 20:Nhg6GrtL0nlfnSozuvZoAbMgodOPR7IOtc5XnVuBjf21siobkBj6dH6Cw8wuv4IWx+FfYB1iJ4WYGY6aoTYq+g== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR03MB444; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(189930954265078); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425024)(601004)(2401047)(520078)(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001)(61426024)(61427024); SRVR:BY2PR03MB444; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR03MB444; x-forefront-prvs: 0726B2D7A6 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(189002)(24454002)(377454003)(199003)(54356999)(50986999)(5001770100001)(81156007)(2900100001)(97736004)(101416001)(19625215002)(99286002)(76176999)(46102003)(105586002)(8990500004)(5004730100002)(66066001)(92566002)(5007970100001)(15975445007)(19580395003)(19580405001)(2950100001)(76576001)(5003600100002)(64706001)(102836002)(77096005)(10290500002)(5005710100001)(5002640100001)(5001960100002)(10090500001)(10400500002)(106356001)(189998001)(122556002)(40100003)(86362001)(19617315012)(74316001)(86612001)(575784001)(16236675004)(5008740100001)(33656002)(87936001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR03MB444; H:BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BY2PR03MB442AEF7A3EBD1A9EAB7CC90F5320BY2PR03MB442namprd_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 11 Oct 2015 18:15:38.4393 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR03MB444 Archived-At: Cc: "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Assigning CBOR tags to key structures X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 18:16:07 -0000 --_000_BY2PR03MB442AEF7A3EBD1A9EAB7CC90F5320BY2PR03MB442namprd_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 KzENCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQpGcm9tOiBDYXJzdGVuIEJvcm1h bm48bWFpbHRvOmNhYm9AdHppLm9yZz4NClNlbnQ6IOKAjjEwL+KAjjExL+KAjjIwMTUgMjozMiBB TQ0KVG86IEppbSBTY2hhYWQ8bWFpbHRvOmlldGZAYXVndXN0Y2VsbGFycy5jb20+DQpDYzogY29z ZUBpZXRmLm9yZzxtYWlsdG86Y29zZUBpZXRmLm9yZz4NClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbQ09TRV0gQXNz aWduaW5nIENCT1IgdGFncyB0byBrZXkgc3RydWN0dXJlcw0KDQpJJ2QgcHJvcG9zZSB0aGlzIHJ1 bGU6DQpJZiB0aGVyZSBpcyBhIG1lZGlhIHR5cGUsIHRoZXJlIHNob3VsZCBiZSBhIENCT1IgdGFn IGZvciB0aG9zZQ0KZW52aXJvbm1lbnRzIHRoYXQgZG9uJ3QgYmVuZWZpdCBmcm9tIG1lZGlhIHR5 cGVzLg0KKEFuZCBnZW5lcmFsbHkgdmljZSB2ZXJzYSwgdW5sZXNzIHdlIGFyZSB1c2luZyBDQk9S IHRhZ3MgaW4gb3RoZXIgdGhhbg0KdG9wLWxldmVsIHBvc2l0aW9ucy4pDQoNCkdyw7zDn2UsIENh cnN0ZW4NCg0KDQpKaW0gU2NoYWFkIHdyb3RlOg0KPiBJIGFtIGN1cnJlbnRseSB3b3JraW5nIG9u IHRoZSBJQU5BIHRleHQgZm9yIGRvaW5nIGFzc2lnbm1lbnQgb2YgQ0JPUiB0YWdzIGluDQo+IENP U0UuDQo+DQo+IFRoZXJlIGlzIGEgcG9zc2liaWxpdHkgdG8gcmVxdWVzdCB0YWdzIGZvciB0aGUg S0VZIGFuZCBLRVlfU0VUIG1hcHMgaW4gdGhlDQo+IGRvY3VtZW50LiAgQXQgdGhlIHByZXNlbnQg dGltZSBJIGhhdmUgbm90IGRvbmUgdGhpcy4gIENhbiBhbnlib2R5IHNlZSBhDQo+IHJlYXNvbiBm b3IgYXNraW5nIGZvciB0YWdzIG9uIHRoZXNlIHR3byBlbGVtZW50cyBvdGhlciB0aGFuIGNvbXBs ZXRlbmVzcz8NCj4gSS5lLiBkb2VzIGFueWJvZHkgaGF2ZSBhIHBsYWNlIHdoZXJlIGl0IHdvdWxk IG1ha2Ugc2Vuc2UgdG8gdXNlIHRoZQ0KPiBwcmUtZGVmaW5lZCB0YWdzIHJhdGhlciB0aGFuIGtu b3dpbmcgZWl0aGVyIGEga2V5IG9yIGtleSBzZXQgaXMgaW4gdGhpcw0KPiBsb2NhdGlvbiAoaXQg aXMgcG9zc2libGUgdG8gZGlzdGluZ3Vpc2ggYmV0d2VlbiB0aGUgdHdvIGl0ZW1zIGJhc2VkIG9u IHRoZQ0KPiBhbiBhcnJheSB2cyBtYXAgdGFnLikNCj4NCj4NCj4gSmltDQo+DQo+DQo+IF9fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+IENPU0UgbWFpbGlu ZyBsaXN0DQo+IENPU0VAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gaHR0cHM6Ly9uYTAxLnNhZmVsaW5rcy5wcm90ZWN0 aW9uLm91dGxvb2suY29tLz91cmw9aHR0cHMlM2ElMmYlMmZ3d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmclMmZtYWlsbWFu JTJmbGlzdGluZm8lMmZjb3NlJmRhdGE9MDElN2MwMSU3Y01pY2hhZWwuSm9uZXMlNDBtaWNyb3Nv ZnQuY29tJTdjNDAyNDRjMmI2NTZmNDkzN2JiMGEwOGQyZDIxZWRkNTYlN2M3MmY5ODhiZjg2ZjE0 MWFmOTFhYjJkN2NkMDExZGI0NyU3YzEmc2RhdGE9MEtNMlcxOGQlMmJPelY1V0lkVTElMmZEclhj RWFkZENRQUdwZzgyUjUzTzZtelUlM2QNCj4NCg0KX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCkNPU0UgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQpDT1NFQGlldGYub3JnDQpo dHRwczovL25hMDEuc2FmZWxpbmtzLnByb3RlY3Rpb24ub3V0bG9vay5jb20vP3VybD1odHRwcyUz YSUyZiUyZnd3dy5pZXRmLm9yZyUyZm1haWxtYW4lMmZsaXN0aW5mbyUyZmNvc2UlMGEmZGF0YT0w MSU3YzAxJTdjTWljaGFlbC5Kb25lcyU0MG1pY3Jvc29mdC5jb20lN2M0MDI0NGMyYjY1NmY0OTM3 YmIwYTA4ZDJkMjFlZGQ1NiU3YzcyZjk4OGJmODZmMTQxYWY5MWFiMmQ3Y2QwMTFkYjQ3JTdjMSZz ZGF0YT04VlpEQ2ljbWFjSmQ0YkJISVpoTTExZ2NFNUtVNWxTV0hkYjVTRmZycHV3JTNkDQo= --_000_BY2PR03MB442AEF7A3EBD1A9EAB7CC90F5320BY2PR03MB442namprd_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjxtZXRhIG5hbWU9IkdlbmVyYXRvciIgY29udGVu dD0iTWljcm9zb2Z0IEV4Y2hhbmdlIFNlcnZlciI+DQo8IS0tIGNvbnZlcnRlZCBmcm9tIHRleHQg LS0+PHN0eWxlPjwhLS0gLkVtYWlsUXVvdGUgeyBtYXJnaW4tbGVmdDogMXB0OyBwYWRkaW5nLWxl ZnQ6IDRwdDsgYm9yZGVyLWxlZnQ6ICM4MDAwMDAgMnB4IHNvbGlkOyB9IC0tPjwvc3R5bGU+DQo8 L2hlYWQ+DQo8Ym9keT4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2Fs aWJyaSxzYW5zLXNlcmlmOyBmb250LXNpemU6MTFwdCI+JiM0MzsxPGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjxkaXYgZGlyPSJsdHIiPg0KPGhyPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNhbGli cmksc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgZm9udC1zaXplOjExcHQ7IGZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJvbGQiPkZyb206DQo8 L3NwYW4+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNhbGlicmksc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgZm9udC1z aXplOjExcHQiPjxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpjYWJvQHR6aS5vcmciPkNhcnN0ZW4gQm9ybWFubjwv YT48L3NwYW4+PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNhbGlicmksc2Fucy1zZXJp ZjsgZm9udC1zaXplOjExcHQ7IGZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJvbGQiPlNlbnQ6DQo8L3NwYW4+PHNwYW4g c3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNhbGlicmksc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgZm9udC1zaXplOjExcHQiPuKA jjEwL+KAjjExL+KAjjIwMTUgMjozMiBBTTwvc3Bhbj48YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1m YW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaSxzYW5zLXNlcmlmOyBmb250LXNpemU6MTFwdDsgZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9s ZCI+VG86DQo8L3NwYW4+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNhbGlicmksc2Fucy1zZXJp ZjsgZm9udC1zaXplOjExcHQiPjxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzppZXRmQGF1Z3VzdGNlbGxhcnMuY29t Ij5KaW0gU2NoYWFkPC9hPjwvc3Bhbj48YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2Fs aWJyaSxzYW5zLXNlcmlmOyBmb250LXNpemU6MTFwdDsgZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+Q2M6DQo8 L3NwYW4+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNhbGlicmksc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgZm9udC1z aXplOjExcHQiPjxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpjb3NlQGlldGYub3JnIj5jb3NlQGlldGYub3JnPC9h Pjwvc3Bhbj48YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaSxzYW5zLXNlcmlm OyBmb250LXNpemU6MTFwdDsgZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+U3ViamVjdDoNCjwvc3Bhbj48c3Bh biBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaSxzYW5zLXNlcmlmOyBmb250LXNpemU6MTFwdCI+ UmU6IFtDT1NFXSBBc3NpZ25pbmcgQ0JPUiB0YWdzIHRvIGtleSBzdHJ1Y3R1cmVzPC9zcGFuPjxi cj4NCjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8Zm9udCBzaXplPSIyIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9u dC1zaXplOjEwcHQ7Ij4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9IlBsYWluVGV4dCI+SSdkIHByb3Bvc2UgdGhpcyBy dWxlOjxicj4NCklmIHRoZXJlIGlzIGEgbWVkaWEgdHlwZSwgdGhlcmUgc2hvdWxkIGJlIGEgQ0JP UiB0YWcgZm9yIHRob3NlPGJyPg0KZW52aXJvbm1lbnRzIHRoYXQgZG9uJ3QgYmVuZWZpdCBmcm9t IG1lZGlhIHR5cGVzLjxicj4NCihBbmQgZ2VuZXJhbGx5IHZpY2UgdmVyc2EsIHVubGVzcyB3ZSBh cmUgdXNpbmcgQ0JPUiB0YWdzIGluIG90aGVyIHRoYW48YnI+DQp0b3AtbGV2ZWwgcG9zaXRpb25z Lik8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpHcsO8w59lLCBDYXJzdGVuPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KSmltIFNjaGFh ZCB3cm90ZTo8YnI+DQomZ3Q7IEkgYW0gY3VycmVudGx5IHdvcmtpbmcgb24gdGhlIElBTkEgdGV4 dCBmb3IgZG9pbmcgYXNzaWdubWVudCBvZiBDQk9SIHRhZ3MgaW48YnI+DQomZ3Q7IENPU0UuIDxi cj4NCiZndDsgPGJyPg0KJmd0OyBUaGVyZSBpcyBhIHBvc3NpYmlsaXR5IHRvIHJlcXVlc3QgdGFn cyBmb3IgdGhlIEtFWSBhbmQgS0VZX1NFVCBtYXBzIGluIHRoZTxicj4NCiZndDsgZG9jdW1lbnQu Jm5ic3A7IEF0IHRoZSBwcmVzZW50IHRpbWUgSSBoYXZlIG5vdCBkb25lIHRoaXMuJm5ic3A7IENh biBhbnlib2R5IHNlZSBhPGJyPg0KJmd0OyByZWFzb24gZm9yIGFza2luZyBmb3IgdGFncyBvbiB0 aGVzZSB0d28gZWxlbWVudHMgb3RoZXIgdGhhbiBjb21wbGV0ZW5lc3M/PGJyPg0KJmd0OyBJLmUu IGRvZXMgYW55Ym9keSBoYXZlIGEgcGxhY2Ugd2hlcmUgaXQgd291bGQgbWFrZSBzZW5zZSB0byB1 c2UgdGhlPGJyPg0KJmd0OyBwcmUtZGVmaW5lZCB0YWdzIHJhdGhlciB0aGFuIGtub3dpbmcgZWl0 aGVyIGEga2V5IG9yIGtleSBzZXQgaXMgaW4gdGhpczxicj4NCiZndDsgbG9jYXRpb24gKGl0IGlz IHBvc3NpYmxlIHRvIGRpc3Rpbmd1aXNoIGJldHdlZW4gdGhlIHR3byBpdGVtcyBiYXNlZCBvbiB0 aGU8YnI+DQomZ3Q7IGFuIGFycmF5IHZzIG1hcCB0YWcuKTxicj4NCiZndDsgPGJyPg0KJmd0OyA8 YnI+DQomZ3Q7IEppbTxicj4NCiZndDsgPGJyPg0KJmd0OyA8YnI+DQomZ3Q7IF9fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fPGJyPg0KJmd0OyBDT1NFIG1haWxp bmcgbGlzdDxicj4NCiZndDsgQ09TRUBpZXRmLm9yZzxicj4NCiZndDsgPGEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cHM6 Ly9uYTAxLnNhZmVsaW5rcy5wcm90ZWN0aW9uLm91dGxvb2suY29tLz91cmw9aHR0cHMlM2ElMmYl MmZ3d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmclMmZtYWlsbWFuJTJmbGlzdGluZm8lMmZjb3NlJmFtcDtkYXRhPTAxJTdj MDElN2NNaWNoYWVsLkpvbmVzJTQwbWljcm9zb2Z0LmNvbSU3YzQwMjQ0YzJiNjU2ZjQ5MzdiYjBh MDhkMmQyMWVkZDU2JTdjNzJmOTg4YmY4NmYxNDFhZjkxYWIyZDdjZDAxMWRiNDclN2MxJmFtcDtz ZGF0YT0wS00yVzE4ZCUyYk96VjVXSWRVMSUyZkRyWGNFYWRkQ1FBR3BnODJSNTNPNm16VSUzZCI+ DQpodHRwczovL25hMDEuc2FmZWxpbmtzLnByb3RlY3Rpb24ub3V0bG9vay5jb20vP3VybD1odHRw cyUzYSUyZiUyZnd3dy5pZXRmLm9yZyUyZm1haWxtYW4lMmZsaXN0aW5mbyUyZmNvc2UmYW1wO2Rh dGE9MDElN2MwMSU3Y01pY2hhZWwuSm9uZXMlNDBtaWNyb3NvZnQuY29tJTdjNDAyNDRjMmI2NTZm NDkzN2JiMGEwOGQyZDIxZWRkNTYlN2M3MmY5ODhiZjg2ZjE0MWFmOTFhYjJkN2NkMDExZGI0NyU3 YzEmYW1wO3NkYXRhPTBLTTJXMThkJTJiT3pWNVdJZFUxJTJmRHJYY0VhZGRDUUFHcGc4MlI1M082 bXpVJTNkPC9hPjxicj4NCiZndDsgPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX188YnI+DQpDT1NFIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdDxicj4NCkNPU0VA aWV0Zi5vcmc8YnI+DQo8YSBocmVmPSJodHRwczovL25hMDEuc2FmZWxpbmtzLnByb3RlY3Rpb24u b3V0bG9vay5jb20vP3VybD1odHRwcyUzYSUyZiUyZnd3dy5pZXRmLm9yZyUyZm1haWxtYW4lMmZs aXN0aW5mbyUyZmNvc2UlMGEmYW1wO2RhdGE9MDElN2MwMSU3Y01pY2hhZWwuSm9uZXMlNDBtaWNy b3NvZnQuY29tJTdjNDAyNDRjMmI2NTZmNDkzN2JiMGEwOGQyZDIxZWRkNTYlN2M3MmY5ODhiZjg2 ZjE0MWFmOTFhYjJkN2NkMDExZGI0NyU3YzEmYW1wO3NkYXRhPThWWkRDaWNtYWNKZDRiQkhJWmhN MTFnY0U1S1U1bFNXSGRiNVNGZnJwdXclM2QiPmh0dHBzOi8vbmEwMS5zYWZlbGlua3MucHJvdGVj dGlvbi5vdXRsb29rLmNvbS8/dXJsPWh0dHBzJTNhJTJmJTJmd3d3LmlldGYub3JnJTJmbWFpbG1h biUyZmxpc3RpbmZvJTJmY29zZSUwYSZhbXA7ZGF0YT0wMSU3YzAxJTdjTWljaGFlbC5Kb25lcyU0 MG1pY3Jvc29mdC5jb20lN2M0MDI0NGMyYjY1NmY0OTM3YmIwYTA4ZDJkMjFlZGQ1NiU3YzcyZjk4 OGJmODZmMTQxYWY5MWFiMmQ3Y2QwMTFkYjQ3JTdjMSZhbXA7c2RhdGE9OFZaRENpY21hY0pkNGJC SElaaE0xMWdjRTVLVTVsU1dIZGI1U0ZmcnB1dyUzZDwvYT48L2Rpdj4NCjwvc3Bhbj48L2ZvbnQ+ DQo8L2JvZHk+DQo8L2h0bWw+DQo= --_000_BY2PR03MB442AEF7A3EBD1A9EAB7CC90F5320BY2PR03MB442namprd_-- From nobody Sun Oct 11 11:25:14 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C40B11B2C5F for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:25:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 zKEIxLf0cc2Q for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:25:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp2.pacifier.net (smtp2.pacifier.net [64.255.237.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 400D51B2C5A for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:25:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (winery.augustcellars.com [206.212.239.129]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp2.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5E0132CA0D; Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:25:10 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: "'Carsten Bormann'" References: <08eb01d103c8$3deade00$b9c09a00$@augustcellars.com> <561A2C9B.5060104@tzi.org> In-Reply-To: <561A2C9B.5060104@tzi.org> Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:22:34 -0700 Message-ID: <094001d10451$cccec4e0$666c4ea0$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQGex/CO2QN+9BtqSk7SR9o8Xg6cPgIFoq+pnrrmkHA= Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Assigning CBOR tags to key structures X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 18:25:12 -0000 As a general rule, this makes sense to me. Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: Carsten Bormann [mailto:cabo@tzi.org] > Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 2:32 AM > To: Jim Schaad > Cc: cose@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [COSE] Assigning CBOR tags to key structures >=20 > I'd propose this rule: > If there is a media type, there should be a CBOR tag for those = environments that > don't benefit from media types. > (And generally vice versa, unless we are using CBOR tags in other than = top-level > positions.) >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 >=20 > Jim Schaad wrote: > > I am currently working on the IANA text for doing assignment of CBOR > > tags in COSE. > > > > There is a possibility to request tags for the KEY and KEY_SET maps = in > > the document. At the present time I have not done this. Can = anybody > > see a reason for asking for tags on these two elements other than > completeness? > > I.e. does anybody have a place where it would make sense to use the > > pre-defined tags rather than knowing either a key or key set is in > > this location (it is possible to distinguish between the two items > > based on the an array vs map tag.) > > > > > > Jim > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > COSE mailing list > > COSE@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose > > From nobody Mon Oct 12 01:00:24 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A87F01A8761 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 01:00:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 n1hqbsxlHEnH for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 01:00:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-f173.google.com (mail-lb0-f173.google.com [209.85.217.173]) (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 B42E41A8760 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 01:00:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by lbwr8 with SMTP id r8so133177078lbw.2 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 01:00:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type; bh=Up4TfDo2/oDBFtjfzbcYtOEfcdJMc5cFlZthzA2PJGE=; b=bYrHQe4EnmLoJde6vwd4SCltTk2JSSxMTSYogKA/jB0nsChjv4QYZmT8ct9VPD5UAM kwqAt+I/twZC0pu3Xn9G4BKXVNPs7S3SGQh/giNN8uSRrv2OTtxrUpFPkO1gu8ebLWJS AKsBwh0sM6VAS18bERQ3maDSXY+bY5IVj+LHyem3kTfTxImvbKMETijWO9W9FIh3/ub+ wDF3khE0br4ukiMGiTG4S9/6eHvNpkZ7GlJdzJxP97xFm3DSD0+Q14o2VI5BRbn5L956 3IbNwc6xIwoAiNAjPJOwNoWlxjwO9uSW5K7hwXyu+B2Yd+wbCD+Qun+KTQz+XGYE7HXi nhnA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm3pWEOSDOWk3/fBRT3nHCzVeAzrFWUFZQ4iN6Nr6b5J8wmXGN91Ql0fouTgapOyAIRrSuF X-Received: by 10.25.20.97 with SMTP id k94mr2033569lfi.27.1444636819737; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 01:00:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.108] ([85.235.11.178]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s73sm2689247lfs.32.2015.10.12.01.00.18 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 12 Oct 2015 01:00:19 -0700 (PDT) To: cose@ietf.org References: <560CE792.9080807@gmx.net> <3BDD6486-150D-4D9B-8C16-A920AA9806A4@ericsson.com> <07df01d102d3$03c40cb0$0b4c2610$@augustcellars.com> From: Ludwig Seitz Message-ID: <561B6892.9040307@sics.se> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 10:00:18 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <07df01d102d3$03c40cb0$0b4c2610$@augustcellars.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="------------ms000400030402060400020901" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [COSE] Replay Protection X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 08:00:23 -0000 This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms000400030402060400020901 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2015-10-09 22:42, Jim Schaad wrote: > When we are saying that we want to do "replay detection", exactly what = are we talking about? > > 1. I want to detect if this is the same as the last (n) message(s) tha= t I processed. > Something like that, but rather "I want to detect if this is a message I = already processed, or if I have processed a significant number of=20 messages with higher sequence numbers". The idea is detailed in RFC 6347 section 4.1.2.6 When the sequence number space wraps, we do a rekeying so that all old=20 messages become invalid. /Ludwig --=20 Ludwig Seitz, PhD SICS Swedish ICT AB Ideon Science Park Building Beta 2 Scheelev=C3=A4gen 17 SE-223 70 Lund Phone +46(0)70-349 92 51 http://www.sics.se --------------ms000400030402060400020901 Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExDzANBglghkgBZQMEAgEFADCABgkqhkiG9w0BBwEAAKCC DFQwggYYMIIFAKADAgECAgMMhpgwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMRYw FAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSswKQYDVQQLEyJTZWN1cmUgRGlnaXRhbCBDZXJ0aWZp Y2F0ZSBTaWduaW5nMTgwNgYDVQQDEy9TdGFydENvbSBDbGFzcyAxIFByaW1hcnkgSW50ZXJt ZWRpYXRlIENsaWVudCBDQTAeFw0xNTAxMDgwODM5MDZaFw0xNjAxMDkyMjQxMzBaMDgxFzAV BgNVBAMMDmx1ZHdpZ0BzaWNzLnNlMR0wGwYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFg5sdWR3aWdAc2ljcy5zZTCC ASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMVB4rAuq4FxbARxwRqPLpc/3C194F+V H4XMKK6fu3Y8zDLijzNSjh6tG41oZhXvJcvAs1nZNjUutNLeyBAUFiYhy7HXNdlKpjbMEFKQ +6KpEdZ0Rk+pXgB2E1mqZEfp3M2djcQ/h+7uGVlSGYNAxYk6rWPIIWBx2GMvAQaHP4xxu/F+ PiSQILOVzmtIFZe1t/Lw71aaNeMYVhARo8z5PVsVoq6gBeujxfiRLtiQ/S8xW6RKvNvUkVyT BQfcKaEDZR9FENNf9rFgiAcT6R7hI8RBf1d2fxdlbDU8uM72K3fvzGDt8N9Bfm1kDWbDBxJE 1taRIYs+60D1kwV6DvBb9MECAwEAAaOCAtQwggLQMAkGA1UdEwQCMAAwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgSw MB0GA1UdJQQWMBQGCCsGAQUFBwMCBggrBgEFBQcDBDAdBgNVHQ4EFgQU6ryrKahJtBOEdbIL AAWCpOsQyagwHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUU3Ltkpzg2ssBXHx+ljVO8tS4UYIwGQYDVR0RBBIwEIEO bHVkd2lnQHNpY3Muc2UwggFMBgNVHSAEggFDMIIBPzCCATsGCysGAQQBgbU3AQIDMIIBKjAu BggrBgEFBQcCARYiaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vcG9saWN5LnBkZjCB9wYIKwYB BQUHAgIwgeowJxYgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwAwIBARqBvlRo aXMgY2VydGlmaWNhdGUgd2FzIGlzc3VlZCBhY2NvcmRpbmcgdG8gdGhlIENsYXNzIDEgVmFs aWRhdGlvbiByZXF1aXJlbWVudHMgb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENBIHBvbGljeSwgcmVsaWFu Y2Ugb25seSBmb3IgdGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHB1cnBvc2UgaW4gY29tcGxpYW5jZSBvZiB0aGUg cmVseWluZyBwYXJ0eSBvYmxpZ2F0aW9ucy4wNgYDVR0fBC8wLTAroCmgJ4YlaHR0cDovL2Ny bC5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vY3J0dTEtY3JsLmNybDCBjgYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgYEwfzA5BggrBgEF BQcwAYYtaHR0cDovL29jc3Auc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL3N1Yi9jbGFzczEvY2xpZW50L2NhMEIG CCsGAQUFBzAChjZodHRwOi8vYWlhLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9jZXJ0cy9zdWIuY2xhc3MxLmNs aWVudC5jYS5jcnQwIwYDVR0SBBwwGoYYaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vMA0GCSqG SIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQBl8BbG0n7+JjFqiJOuAqMbkeqM6Oyd+4oHGu3fbaSiM1SKesae2bfm vifV99a+M4DERZ2SVkOYcvNlv31Q3hvYtzRjDOqewzVKxo021R3ddQULW1DhvTEpclikG5rd 0NRJQn+EkSwEKLeUj68i0dhU8ULhZDDq3A81cTcZzIGrTjNnwDvCktB/sF/iO4At6RJ24P3j KjYFPirW3NsvZ2gzZizSzeubPE0/cWcqEBJ/UtaFPF54efejjLuPRHHMLPDcvrwBhEiBxuG6 oTEo465g4pS9Vo/Z0GoZgZyA+aGQ+YPbPSsqsYmSBjZ6MGGDqQq0niE2dW+8IOdHQvMkqI52 MIIGNDCCBBygAwIBAgIBHjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADB9MQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UE ChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjErMCkGA1UECxMiU2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUg U2lnbmluZzEpMCcGA1UEAxMgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwHhcN MDcxMDI0MjEwMTU1WhcNMTcxMDI0MjEwMTU1WjCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoT DVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNp Z25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMTL1N0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDEgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUg Q2xpZW50IENBMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAxwmDzM4t2BqxKaQu E6uWvooyg4ymiEGWVUet1G8SD+rqvyNH4QrvnEIaFHxOhESip7vMz39ScLpNLbL1QpOlPW/t FIzNHS3qd2XRNYG5Sv9RcGE+T4qbLtsjjJbi6sL7Ls/f/X9ftTyhxvxWkf8KW37iKrueKsxw 2HqolH7GM6FX5UfNAwAu4ZifkpmZzU1slBhyWwaQPEPPZRsWoTb7q8hmgv6Nv3Hg9rmA1/VP BIOQ6SKRkHXG0Hhmq1dOFoAFI411+a/9nWm5rcVjGcIWZ2v/43Yksq60jExipA4l5uv9/+Hm 33mbgmCszdj/Dthf13tgAv2O83hLJ0exTqfrlwIDAQABo4IBrTCCAakwDwYDVR0TAQH/BAUw AwEB/zAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwHQYDVR0OBBYEFFNy7ZKc4NrLAVx8fpY1TvLUuFGCMB8G A1UdIwQYMBaAFE4L7xqkQFulF2mHMMo0aEPQQa7yMGYGCCsGAQUFBwEBBFowWDAnBggrBgEF BQcwAYYbaHR0cDovL29jc3Auc3RhcnRzc2wuY29tL2NhMC0GCCsGAQUFBzAChiFodHRwOi8v d3d3LnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNvbS9zZnNjYS5jcnQwWwYDVR0fBFQwUjAnoCWgI4YhaHR0cDovL3d3 dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vc2ZzY2EuY3JsMCegJaAjhiFodHRwOi8vY3JsLnN0YXJ0c3NsLmNv bS9zZnNjYS5jcmwwgYAGA1UdIAR5MHcwdQYLKwYBBAGBtTcBAgEwZjAuBggrBgEFBQcCARYi aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vcG9saWN5LnBkZjA0BggrBgEFBQcCARYoaHR0cDov L3d3dy5zdGFydHNzbC5jb20vaW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAgEA CoMIfXirLAZcuGOMXq4cuSN3TaFx2H2GvD5VSy/6rV55BYHbWNaPeQn3oBSU8KgQZn/Kck1J xbLpAxVCNtsxeW1R87ifhsYZ0qjdrA9anrW2MAWCtosmAOT4OxK9QPoSjCMxM3HbkZCDJgnl E8jMopH21BbyAYr7b5EfGRQJNtgWcvqSXwKHnTutR08+Kkn0KAkXCzeQNLeA5LlYUzFyM7kP Ap8pIRMQ+seHunmyG642S2+y/qHEdMuGIwpfz3eDF1PdctL04qYK/zu+Qg1Bw0RwgigVZs/0 c5HP2/e9DBHh7eSwtzYlk4AUr6yxLlcwSjOfOmKEQ/Q8tzh0IFiNu9IPuTGAPBn4CPxD0+Ru 8T2wg8/s43R/PT3kd1OEqOJUl7q+h+r6fpvU0Fzxd2tC8Ga6fDEPme+1Nbi+03pVjuZQKbGw KJ66gEn06WqaxVZC+J8hh/jR0k9mST1iAZPNYulcNJ8tKmVtjYsv0L1TSm2+NwON58tO+pIV zu3DWwSEXSf+qkDavQam+QtEOZxLBXI++aMUEapSn+k3Lxm48ZCYfAWLb/Xj7F5JQMbZvCex glAbYR0kIHqW5DnsYSdMD/IplJMojx0NBrxJ3fN9dvX2Y6BIXRsF1du4qESm4/3CKuyUV7p9 DW3mPlHTGLvYxnyKQy7VFBkoLINszBrOUeIxggPtMIID6QIBATCBlDCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMC SUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzApBgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENl cnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMTL1N0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDEgUHJpbWFyeSBJ bnRlcm1lZGlhdGUgQ2xpZW50IENBAgMMhpgwDQYJYIZIAWUDBAIBBQCgggIpMBgGCSqGSIb3 DQEJAzELBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkFMQ8XDTE1MTAxMjA4MDAxOFowLwYJKoZI hvcNAQkEMSIEID/661HTzVTfWXX/UIXM/Ma1998eFMqynKzhW3HnknJzMGwGCSqGSIb3DQEJ DzFfMF0wCwYJYIZIAWUDBAEqMAsGCWCGSAFlAwQBAjAKBggqhkiG9w0DBzAOBggqhkiG9w0D AgICAIAwDQYIKoZIhvcNAwICAUAwBwYFKw4DAgcwDQYIKoZIhvcNAwICASgwgaUGCSsGAQQB gjcQBDGBlzCBlDCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xKzAp BgNVBAsTIlNlY3VyZSBEaWdpdGFsIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxODA2BgNVBAMTL1N0 YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDEgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRlcm1lZGlhdGUgQ2xpZW50IENBAgMMhpgwgacG CyqGSIb3DQEJEAILMYGXoIGUMIGMMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20g THRkLjErMCkGA1UECxMiU2VjdXJlIERpZ2l0YWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzE4MDYG A1UEAxMvU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMSBQcmltYXJ5IEludGVybWVkaWF0ZSBDbGllbnQgQ0EC AwyGmDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASCAQBByGvJ0+JjcAav3wvDXJyURHxWrqaoY9TZpJz1Npu2 f661B7u8xxxrm1oK/Y06ZCipHb43LV72f/xBm2KQJAuR1/HuxDcOVRs+xyx9wpB3P4cn2agb KQWWCBH5W1y9HYIX1NarSXdQcOaSK1lktXpXmMCpevQX2aJya/VkADiOHRwepYDIt4R5zVlu X/psoqAOdwQZ9uxEWa4viFMTzsWU/7qSZk7k3aYUpkIV2XSfB2kK+8Cu4W7GlH4wdzxhrSEp CXMInpNvyMocuVNiMWQMN+STZRMO5qxLqzuPHfeC9HHI2RwpKglEobaQES/pIB4JItLShSqS dCvdCzZfFJTCAAAAAAAA --------------ms000400030402060400020901-- From nobody Mon Oct 12 19:06:49 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFF2B1B2F0D for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 19:06:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.5 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 Z7nSPmcX0lSH for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 19:06:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp3.pacifier.net (smtp3.pacifier.net [64.255.237.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D29561B2F0C for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 19:06:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (173-8-216-38-Oregon.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.8.216.38]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp3.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D1BBB38F0E; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 19:06:44 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: "'Carsten Bormann'" References: <08ea01d103c7$63d7fe50$2b87faf0$@augustcellars.com> <561A2BBB.4040106@tzi.org> In-Reply-To: <561A2BBB.4040106@tzi.org> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 19:04:05 -0700 Message-ID: <0aef01d1055b$706dc560$51495020$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQF0BpxrJs05/2THUzle1Y+ERyhwdQGZM/mUnxXfZWA= Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Use of bignum in cbor encoding X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 02:06:48 -0000 After thinking about this, I think we are better off leaving things as = binary strings than changing to big numbers. The main problem I have is that there could be implementations that are = going to strip leading zeros when doing the encoding. This is a problem = because it makes it harder to ensure that items are the right length. = Going with binary strings eliminates this problem. I am not truly worried about the possible lack of implementation. I = think that any library which is used for COSE is going to get this added = to the implementation in any event if keys are going to be passed = around. Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: Carsten Bormann [mailto:cabo@tzi.org] > Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 2:28 AM > To: Jim Schaad > Cc: cose@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [COSE] Use of bignum in cbor encoding >=20 > > There is a CBOR type of bignum which appears to have been designed = to > > have big integers placed it in. Are there any objections to = changing from using > > the binary string (bstr) to big number (bignum) in those locations? = My > > understanding of the document is that the length of the resulting > > encoding is going to be the same. >=20 > Good question. >=20 > CBOR has bignums so there is a common convention for representing = integers > that don't fit in 64 bits. At the data model level, a bignum is a = sign (which is > encoded into the tag) and the byte string that represents that number = in binary. > The expectation is that environments that can represent such numbers = in a > natural way will decode bignums right in the generic CBOR decoder, so = the > application will simply see an integer; more constrained applications = will see the > tag and the byte string. >=20 > That a specific place really holds an integer may be clear from the = context, so it > may not be necessary to tag the byte string representing that integer = as a > bignum*). > If a large integer is represented as a byte string without a tag, you = lose the > automatic decoding in the less constrained environments. You also = lose the sign > bit. So, if you have that context, the tag costs you > 8 bits if the integer really is unsigned, 7 bits if you would have = encoded the sign > efficiently in the byte string (e.g., using two's complement), and = possibly nothing > at all if your sign representation is less efficient (or causes = expansion of the byte > string by one byte). >=20 > Jim: I think you are looking at the places marked CREF14 and CREF15 in = -05. For > ECC, while it is certainly possible to specify that leading zero bytes = are not to be > removed, forcing bignums to do that here would lose the benefit from = using a > generic encoder (which would very likely remove those leading zeroes). = For RSA, > it would be natural to use bignums, or if that byte is really too = much, possibly > just exactly the byte string encoding from bignums without the tag. >=20 > Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 > *) (Conversely, the tag *is* the natural way to represent a choice in = a place > where the information model has a choice between a possibly large = integer and > a byte string.) From nobody Tue Oct 13 00:28:54 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D37DC1B3652 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 00:28:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 tG2LFaYYhRon for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 00:28:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sesbmg23.ericsson.net (sesbmg23.ericsson.net [193.180.251.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42D371B3649 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 00:28:50 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-f79a26d00000149a-31-561cb2b0294d Received: from ESESSHC024.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sesbmg23.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id A1.7C.05274.0B2BC165; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:28:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ESESSMB303.ericsson.se ([169.254.3.99]) by ESESSHC024.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.90]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 09:28:47 +0200 From: =?utf-8?B?R8O2cmFuIFNlbGFuZGVy?= To: Jim Schaad , 'Hannes Tschofenig' Thread-Topic: [COSE] Replay Protection Thread-Index: AQHQ/B8PzajSNYBVZ0mnAoCQmChMOZ5a6GmAgACedYCABbSOgIACUNQAgAWNF4A= Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 07:28:46 +0000 Message-ID: References: <560CE792.9080807@gmx.net> <3BDD6486-150D-4D9B-8C16-A920AA9806A4@ericsson.com> <07df01d102d3$03c40cb0$0b4c2610$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: <07df01d102d3$03c40cb0$0b4c2610$@augustcellars.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.7.141117 x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.148] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprFIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvje6GTTJhBjvfy1lM2zqV1WLpznus Fqunf2dzYPbYOGc6m8fiTfvZPJYs+ckUwBzFZZOSmpNZllqkb5fAlbFg1xnGgl12Fc8atjM2 ML6x6WLk5JAQMJHoWHmREcIWk7hwbz1bFyMXh5DAUUaJ5du6mSGcxYwSe4/PZQGpYhNwkXjQ 8IgJxBYRiJJYs/g6WJxZQFmiccMlIJuDQ1hAVeLfPw6IEjWJA5ufs0HYfhLXbi1iBrFZgEqO Hn8KNoZXwEJi255GVohdk5gktvx5xw6S4BRwkGi//AxsPiPQdd9PrWGC2CUucevJfCaIqwUk luw5zwxhi0q8fPyPFcQWFdCTWHm9iQ0iriTRuOQJK8htzAKaEut36UOMsZbY/Ooa1PmKElO6 H7JD3CMocXLmE5YJjBKzkGybhdA9C0n3LCTds5B0L2BkXcUoWpxanJSbbmSsl1qUmVxcnJ+n l5dasokRGJkHt/xW3cF4+Y3jIUYBDkYlHt4FqTJhQqyJZcWVuYcYpTlYlMR5m5kehAoJpCeW pGanphakFsUXleakFh9iZOLglGpgVMrK61RfwJfzSiz+fPvGNPbpFfPNgsJFC3OkjPIWWZU5 cF+Z9njz0dwP84/YMn+vuZhdJB3c8sT9uabrN/PH01JsYuLf8svlPp8w659JKp+ctlfMjlyu ooi2ON4JEdISuxvZA7dVZU9uMc9YJFEzWZ95pif/hKBF0yrMpqZWvnrYc+Tvx+9KLMUZiYZa zEXFiQDxaXIVrQIAAA== Archived-At: Cc: "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Replay Protection X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 07:28:53 -0000 DQoNCk9uIDIwMTUtMTAtMDkgMjI6NDIsICJKaW0gU2NoYWFkIiA8aWV0ZkBhdWd1c3RjZWxsYXJz LmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQoNCj5XaGVuIHdlIGFyZSBzYXlpbmcgdGhhdCB3ZSB3YW50IHRvIGRvICJy ZXBsYXkgZGV0ZWN0aW9uIiwNCg0KSSBwcm9iYWJseSBtaXNzZWQgdGhlIHBvaW50IGJ1dCBsZXQg bWUgbWFrZSBhIHRyeToNCklzIHRoZSB0ZXJtICJyZXBsYXkgZGV0ZWN0aW9u4oCdIHVzZWQgdG8g c2lnbmlmeSB0aGF0IGl0IGlzIGxlZnQgdG8gdGhlDQphcHBsaWNhdGlvbiB0byBhY3R1YWxseSBw ZXJmb3JtIHRoZSBwcm9jZXNzaW5nIGVuY29tcGFzc2luZyAicmVwbGF5DQpwcm90ZWN0aW9u4oCd IChpLmUuIGRyb3BwaW5nIG1lc3NhZ2Ugd2l0aCByZWN1cnJpbmcgc2VxdWVuY2UgbnVtYmVyKS4g VGhpcw0KaW4gY29udHJhc3QgdG8g4oCcaW50ZWdyaXR5IHByb3RlY3Rpb24iIHdoZXJlIHRoZSBD T1NFIG1lc3NhZ2UgZm9ybWF0L2NpcGhlcg0Kc3VpdGUgZGVmaW5lcyB0aGUgcHJvY2Vzc2luZy4g KE9yIGlmIG5vdCwgd2h5IGRvbuKAmXQgd2UgYWxzbyBzcGVhayBvZg0KImludGVncml0eSBkZXRl Y3Rpb27igJ0/KQ0KDQoNCg0KPmV4YWN0bHkgd2hhdCBhcmUgd2UgdGFsa2luZyBhYm91dD8NCj4g DQo+DQo+MS4gIEkgd2FudCB0byBkZXRlY3QgaWYgdGhpcyBpcyB0aGUgc2FtZSBhcyB0aGUgbGFz dCAobikgbWVzc2FnZShzKSB0aGF0DQo+SSBwcm9jZXNzZWQuDQo+DQo+Mi4gIEkgd2FudCB0byBk ZXRlY3QgaWYgdGhpcyBtZXNzYWdlIHdhcyAic2VudCIgYmVmb3JlIHRoZSBsYXN0IG1lc3NhZ2Ug SQ0KPnByb2Nlc3NlZC4NCj4NCj4zLiAgU29tZSBtZXNzYWdlIG9mIGJvdGggLSBwbGVhc2UgZXhw YW5kLg0KPg0KPjQuICBTb21ldGhpbmcgZW50aXJlbHkgZGlmZmVyZW50Lg0KDQpJIHRoaW5rIHRo aXMgaXMgYXBwbGljYXRpb24gZGVwZW5kZW50LiBMdWR3aWcgcG9pbnRlZCBhdCBvbmUgc2NoZW1l LiBPdGhlcg0KYXBwbGljYXRpb25zIG1heSByZXF1aXJlIHN0cmljdCBtb25vdG9uaWNpdHksIGUu Zy4gd2hlbiB0aGUgbGF0ZXN0IG1lc3NhZ2UNCm9ic29sZXRlcyBwcmV2aW91cy4NCg0KR8O2cmFu DQoNCg0KPg0KPkppbQ0KPg0KPg0KPg0KPj4gLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj4+ IEZyb206IENPU0UgW21haWx0bzpjb3NlLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmddIE9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZiBH w7ZyYW4gU2VsYW5kZXINCj4+IFNlbnQ6IFRodXJzZGF5LCBPY3RvYmVyIDA4LCAyMDE1IDEyOjIx IEFNDQo+PiBUbzogTWlrZSBKb25lcyA8TWljaGFlbC5Kb25lc0BtaWNyb3NvZnQuY29tPjsgSGFu bmVzIFRzY2hvZmVuaWcNCj4+IDxoYW5uZXMudHNjaG9mZW5pZ0BnbXgubmV0Pg0KPj4gQ2M6IGNv c2VAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4+IFN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbQ09TRV0gUmVwbGF5IFByb3RlY3Rpb24NCj4+ IA0KPj4gDQo+PiBPbiAyMDE1LTEwLTA0IDIwOjEzLCAiTWlrZSBKb25lcyIgPE1pY2hhZWwuSm9u ZXNAbWljcm9zb2Z0LmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQo+PiANCj4+ID5UaGUgZmFjdCB0aGF0IHdlJ3JlIGV2 ZW4gaGF2aW5nIGEgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBhYm91dCB3aGF0IHRoZSBiZXN0DQo+PiA+Y29udGVudCBm b3IgdGhlIHNlcXVlbmNlIG51bWJlci90aW1lc3RhbXAgaXMgbWVhbnMgdGhhdCB0aGVyZSBhcmUN Cj4+ID5tdWx0aXBsZSBnb29kIGNob2ljZXMgYW5kIHRoYXQgYXBwbGljYXRpb25zIHdpbGwgd2Fu dCB0byB1c2UgdGhlIGNob2ljZQ0KPj4gPmFwcHJvcHJpYXRlIHRvIHRoZSBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbidz IG5lZWRzLiAgVGhhdCdzIHdoeSB0aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uDQo+PiA+c2hvdWxkIGJlIHBhcnQg b2YgdGhlIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIHBheWxvYWQgLSBub3QgcGFydCBvZiB0aGUNCj4+Y3J5cHRvZ3Jh cGhpYw0KPj4gd3JhcHBlci4NCj4+IA0KPj4gU28gZmFyIHdoZW4gd2UgZGlzY3Vzc2VkIHJlcGxh eSBwcm90ZWN0aW9uIGZvciB0aGUgbW9zdCBjb25zdHJhaW5lZA0KPj5kZXZpY2VzIG5vDQo+PiBv bmUgaGFzIGRpc2FncmVlZCB3aXRoIHNlcXVlbmNlIG51bWJlciBiZWluZyBhIGdvb2QgbWVhc3Vy ZSBpbiBnZW5lcmFsLg0KPj5J4oCZbQ0KPj4gdGhpbmtpbmcgb2YgZGV2aWNlcyB3aGljaCBzbGVl cCBhbG1vc3QgYWx3YXlzIHRvIHNhdmUgZW5lcmd5IGFuZCB3aGVyZQ0KPj5zdG9yaW5nDQo+PiBh bmQgc2VhcmNoaW5nIHRocm91Z2ggbGFyZ2UgYW1vdW50cyBvZiBub25jZXMgaXMgbm90IGFuIG9w dGlvbi4gQXMgYW4NCj4+IGFkZGl0aW9uYWwgYmVuZWZpdCBhIGNvdW50ZXIgc3RhcnRpbmcgZnJv bSAwIGVuY29kZWQgaW4gQ0JPUiBpbmN1cnMNCj4+bW9zdCBvZiB0aGUNCj4+IHRpbWUgbGVzcyB0 cmFuc21pc3Npb24gb3ZlcmhlYWQgdGhhbiBhIG5vbmNlIG9yIGEgdGltZXN0YW1wIHdvdWxkIGRv Lg0KPj4gDQo+PiBUaGVyZSBhcmUgY2FzZXMgd2hlcmUgc3luY2hyb25pc2VkIHRpbWUgaXMgYXZh aWxhYmxlIGFuZCB3aGVyZSB5b3UgY291bGQNCj4+IHBvdGVudGlhbGx5IHVzZSBpbnRlZ3JpdHkg cHJvdGVjdGVkIHRpbWVzdGFtcCBmb3Igb3RoZXIgdGhpbmdzIHRoYW4NCj4+anVzdCByZXBsYXkN Cj4+IHByb3RlY3Rpb24sIGxpa2UgaW4gdGhlIDZ0aXNjaCBzZXR0aW5nLiBCdXQgYXMgZmFyIGFz IEkgdW5kZXJzdGFuZA0KPj50aGVyZSBpcyBhbHNvIGENCj4+IGNvbmNlcm4gYWJvdXQgbWVzc2Fn ZSBzaXplIGFuZCBqdXN0IGZvciByZXBsYXkgcHJvdGVjdGlvbiBzZXF1ZW5jZQ0KPj5udW1iZXJz DQo+PiBjb3VsZCBiZSBhcHByb3ByaWF0ZSBpbiB0aGF0IGNhc2UgdG9vLg0KPj4gDQo+PiBTbyB0 aGUgY2xhaW0gaXMgbm90IHRoYXQgeW91IE1VU1QgdXNlIHNlcXVlbmNlIG51bWJlcnMsIGJ1dCB0 aGF0IGluDQo+PmNhc2VzDQo+PiB3aGVyZSBhbiBvcHRpbWl6ZWQgZm9ybWF0IGlzIG1vc3QgbmVl ZGVkIGlzIHdoZXJlIHRoZSB1c2Ugb2Ygc2VxdWVuY2UNCj4+IG51bWJlcnMgaXMgdGhlIG1vc3Qg ZmVhc2libGUgbWV0aG9kIGZvciByZXBsYXkgcHJvdGVjdGlvbi4NCj4+IA0KPj4gSSB3b3VsZCBi ZSBoYXBweSB0byBzdGFuZCBjb3JyZWN0ZWQgaGVyZSB0byBsZWFybiB3aGVuIHRoaXMgYXNzdW1w dGlvbg0KPj5pcw0KPj4gd3JvbmcuDQo+PiANCj4+IElmIG5vdCwgd2hldGhlciB0aGlzIHdvdWxk IGdvIGludG8gdGhlIG1lc3NhZ2Ugc3BlY2lmaWNhdGlvbiBvciBiZWNvbWUNCj4+YSAiQ09TRQ0K Pj4gcHJvZmlsZeKAnSBvZiBzb21lIHNvcnQgaXMgYW5vdGhlciBxdWVzdGlvbi4NCj4+IA0KPj4g DQo+PiANCj4+IEfDtnJhbg0KPj4gDQo+PiANCj4+ID4NCj4+ID5JIHRoaW5rIHBhcnQgb2Ygd2h5 IHRoaXMgaXMgY29taW5nIHVwIGlzIHRoYXQgd2UgZG9uJ3QgaGF2ZSBhIENCT1Igc3BlYw0KPj4g PmZvciBkZWZpbmluZyBzdGFuZGFyZCBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbiBwYXlsb2FkIGNvbnRlbnQgZWxlbWVu dHMgbGlrZSB3ZSBkaWQNCj4+ID5mb3IgSk9TRS4gIEZvciBKT1NFLCB0aGUgY3J5cHRvZ3JhcGhp YyBjb250ZW50IGlzIGRlZmluZWQgaW4gSldTLCBKV0UsDQo+PiA+SldLLCBhbmQgSldBIFtSRkNz IDc1MTUtNzUxOF0uICBXaGVyZWFzLCBzdGFuZGFyZCBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbiBjb250ZW50DQo+PiA+ YXBwcm9wcmlhdGUgZm9yIHNvbWUgY29udGV4dHMgd2FzIGRlZmluZWQgYnkgdGhlIEpTT04gV2Vi IFRva2VuIHNwZWMNCj4+ID5bUkZDIDc1MTldLiAgVGhlcmUgaXNuJ3QgYW4gZXF1aXZhbGVudCB0 byBKV1QgZm9yIENCT1IgYXQgcHJlc2VudC4gIEkNCj4+ID50aGluayB0aGF0J3MgYmVoaW5kIHBh cnQgb2YgdGhlIHVyZ2UgdG8gamFtIHRoaW5ncyBpbnRvIHRoZSBDT1NFDQo+PiA+aGVhZGVycyAt IHNpbmNlIHdlIGhhdmVuJ3QgZGVmaW5lZCBhIHJpZ2h0IHBsYWNlIHRvIHB1dCB0aGVtIGluIHRo ZQ0KPj4gPmFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIHBheWxvYWQuDQo+PiA+DQo+PiA+CQkJCU15IDLCoiB3b3J0aOKA pg0KPj4gPgkJCQktLSBNaWtlDQo+PiA+DQo+PiA+LS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0N Cj4+ID5Gcm9tOiBDT1NFIFttYWlsdG86Y29zZS1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnXSBPbiBCZWhhbGYg T2YgR8O2cmFuIFNlbGFuZGVyDQo+PiA+U2VudDogU3VuZGF5LCBPY3RvYmVyIDA0LCAyMDE1IDE6 NDYgQU0NCj4+ID5UbzogSGFubmVzIFRzY2hvZmVuaWcNCj4+ID5DYzogY29zZUBpZXRmLm9yZw0K Pj4gPlN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbQ09TRV0gUmVwbGF5IFByb3RlY3Rpb24NCj4+ID4NCj4+ID4NCj4+ ID4NCj4+ID4+IE9uIDEgb2t0LiAyMDE1LCBhdCAwOTo1OSwgSGFubmVzIFRzY2hvZmVuaWcNCj4+ ID4+PGhhbm5lcy50c2Nob2ZlbmlnQGdteC5uZXQ+DQo+PiA+Pndyb3RlOg0KPj4gPj4NCj4+ID4+ IEhpIGFsbCwNCj4+ID4+DQo+PiA+PiBjdXJyZW50bHkgdGhlcmUgYXJlIG5vIGZpZWxkcyB0aGF0 IGhlbHAgd2l0aCByZXBseSBwcm90ZWN0aW9uIGluIHRoZQ0KPj4gPj4gQ09TRSBzcGVjaWZpY2F0 aW9uIChhbHRob3VnaCBpbiBwcmFjdGljZSB3aXRoIG90aGVyIHByb3RvY29scyB0aGUNCj4+ID4+ IG5vbmNlIHdpbGwgYmUgcmUtcHVycG9zZWQgYXMgYSBzZXF1ZW5jZSBudW1iZXIgZmllbGQpLg0K Pj4gPj4NCj4+ID4+IEkgd2FzIHdvbmRlcmluZyB3aGV0aGVyIG90aGVycyBpbiB0aGUgZ3JvdXAg dGhvdWdodCBpdCB3b3VsZCBiZQ0KPj4gPj4gdXNlZnVsIHRvIGFkZCBhIHNlcXVlbmNlIG51bWJl ciBhbmQgYSB0aW1lc3RhbXAgZmllbGQgdG8gdGhlIGhlYWRlcg0KPj4gPj4gcGFyYW1ldGVyIHJl Z2lzdHJ5IGZvciB0aG9zZSBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbnMgdGhhdCBkbyBub3Qgd2FudCB0byB1c2UgdGhl DQo+PiA+PiBleHRlcm5hbGx5IHN1cHBsaWVkIGRhdGEgY2FwYWJpbGl0eSBmb3IgcHJvdmlkaW5n IHJlcGxheSBwcm90ZWN0aW9uLg0KPj4gPg0KPj4gPkkgdGhpbmsgdGhlcmUgc2hvdWxkIGJlIGEg Y29tcGFjdCB3YXkgb2YgcmVwcmVzZW50aW5nIGF0IGxlYXN0IHNlcXVlbmNlDQo+PiA+bnVtYmVy cy4gQ29uc2lkZXJpbmcgdGhlIHZhcmlvdXMgY2FuZGlkYXRlcyBJIHdvdWxkIHNheSB0aGF0IG5v bmNlcyBhbmQNCj4+ID50aW1lc3RhbXAgYXJlIG9mIGxlc3MgZ2VuZXJhbCBhcHBsaWNhYmlsaXR5 IGZvciB0aGUgbW9zdCBjb25zdHJhaW5lZA0KPj4gPnNldHRpbmdzLCB3aGljaCBpcyB3aGVyZSB0 aGUgbmVlZCBmb3IgYSB2ZXJ5IGNvbXBhY3QgbWVzc2FnZSBtYXR0ZXJzLg0KPj4gPg0KPj4gPkfD tnJhbg0KPj4gPg0KPj4gPj4NCj4+ID4+IENpYW8NCj4+ID4+IEhhbm5lcw0KPj4gPj4NCj4+ID4+ DQo+PiA+PiBfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0K Pj4gPj4gQ09TRSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj4+ID4+IENPU0VAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4+ID4+IGh0dHBz Oi8vbmEwMS5zYWZlbGlua3MucHJvdGVjdGlvbi5vdXRsb29rLmNvbS8/dXJsPWh0dHBzJTNhJTJm JTJmd3d3Lg0KPj4gPj4gaQ0KPj4gPj4NCj4+IGV0Zi5vcmclMmZtYWlsbWFuJTJmbGlzdGluZm8l MmZjb3NlJmRhdGE9MDElN2MwMSU3Y01pY2hhZWwuSm9uZXMlNDBtaQ0KPj4gPj4gYw0KPj4gPj4N Cj4+IHJvc29mdC5jb20lN2NlNmU5NzdlMjFiZGI0NjM4OGVkYjA4ZDJjYzk4M2VmMiU3YzcyZjk4 OGJmODZmMTQxYWY5MWENCj4+IGIyDQo+PiA+PiBkDQo+PiA3Y2QwMTFkYjQ3JTdjMSZzZGF0YT1i VXZKanBDU2o0c0VheGlMODZ5cTg4ZWVrSWg5d3lLekVLWlNkN1BHTEVvJTNkDQo+PiANCj4+IF9f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+PiBDT1NFIG1h aWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPj4gQ09TRUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPj4gaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFp bG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9jb3NlDQo+DQoNCg== From nobody Sat Oct 17 20:15:45 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3236D1A884E; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 20:15:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 esb0uSVD5rBv; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 20:15:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AF311A883E; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 20:15:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.6.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20151018031543.20501.52750.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 20:15:43 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: [COSE] I-D Action: draft-ietf-cose-msg-06.txt X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 03:15:44 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the CBOR Object Signing and Encryption Working Group of the IETF. Title : CBOR Encoded Message Syntax Author : Jim Schaad Filename : draft-ietf-cose-msg-06.txt Pages : 85 Date : 2015-10-17 Abstract: Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) is data format designed for small code size and small message size. There is a need for the ability to have the basic security services defined for this data format. This document specifies how to do signatures, message authentication codes and encryption using this data format. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-msg/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cose-msg-06 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-cose-msg-06 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Sat Oct 17 20:28:32 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5845B1A8861 for ; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 20:28:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 m08dneTk-9rh for ; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 20:28:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp3.pacifier.net (smtp3.pacifier.net [64.255.237.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84C7B1A885B for ; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 20:28:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (c-24-21-96-37.hsd1.or.comcast.net [24.21.96.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp3.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E5D7938F00 for ; Sat, 17 Oct 2015 20:28:28 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: References: <20151018031605.20482.13212.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20151018031605.20482.13212.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 20:25:48 -0700 Message-ID: <013e01d10954$af2b5310$0d81f930$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQHiliIdDcTsTC71P9qb9j7cQRC4uJ5NfL6g Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] FW: New Version Notification for draft-schaad-cose-alg-00.txt X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 03:28:31 -0000 I have started this document. We can have a discussion on what should = happen to it at the F2F. jim > -----Original Message----- > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org] > Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2015 8:16 PM > To: Jim Schaad ; Jim Schaad > > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-schaad-cose-alg-00.txt >=20 >=20 > A new version of I-D, draft-schaad-cose-alg-00.txt has been = successfully > submitted by Jim Schaad and posted to the IETF repository. >=20 > Name: draft-schaad-cose-alg > Revision: 00 > Title: CBOR Encoded Message Syntax > Document date: 2015-10-17 > Group: Individual Submission > Pages: 41 > URL: = https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-schaad-cose-alg-00.txt > Status: = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-schaad-cose-alg/ > Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-schaad-cose-alg-00 >=20 >=20 > Abstract: > More Alg and Headers for COSE. >=20 > Contributing to this document >=20 > The source for this draft is being maintained in GitHub. Suggested > changes should be submitted as pull requests at = cose-wg/cose-algs>. Instructions are on that page as well. > Editorial changes can be managed in GitHub, but any substantial > issues need to be discussed on the COSE mailing list. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of = submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >=20 > The IETF Secretariat From nobody Mon Oct 19 07:57:12 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7CDF1A92F5 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 07:57:11 -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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 r_bK77FRyVGQ for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 07:57:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk0-x22b.google.com (mail-qk0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22b]) (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 12AE91A92F1 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 07:57:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qkbl190 with SMTP id l190so23442733qkb.2 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 07:57:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=ISHFCR8avSOVb5eBwZrx8L8U2q7ysKHwJO7pDATAr/E=; b=T7uSjRkFpME9SvNZNSPupsc43EeDrlHj44IQlmicLJyW1FfpXLDbQGa3oVyhsWu9wW iOM5fELtdhQ4v8ewZTcMnFmXA9sUv4UhDKpl2CAMgc7T9YaPhftnmSsxzP7JqUp1qUQX eJamZHzLT4dzGUKAKw4tPKVwHlplY2so0XRr19EHKJP7NBkVg2Yko3nfCCS8y6VkoZu0 aUqJ4gtCTFYugB9JLLmVW5ibOhuGvX4l5KFnPjJ0b2S1vYOYqlOaCiJIgWUMtZLApcTj 2roSYsqIUeojk62ifp5WIFGLAx8g43t3lAGiVNyD1Dfc7JoeZByqV6fUztILSuvLuWBk Q8kQ== X-Received: by 10.55.217.209 with SMTP id q78mr35986652qkl.91.1445266629195; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 07:57:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.55.198.66 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 07:56:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Renzo Navas Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 16:56:49 +0200 Message-ID: To: cose@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] comment for draft-ietf-cose-msg-06 X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 14:57:11 -0000 Hi Jim and all, Thanks Jim for this -great- document, I was reading it an came across with a small typo, on section 10.1.1: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cose-msg-06#section-10.1.1 >10.1.1. Security Considerations > When using AES-CCM the following restrictions MUST be enforced: On this section (10.1. AES GCM ) it's AES-GCM the cipher mode in question. Thanks again, have a good start of the week Renzo From nobody Mon Oct 19 08:32:00 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17FCD1ACDA0 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 08:31:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 SkyZHNpmnGl6 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 08:31:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp2.pacifier.net (smtp2.pacifier.net [64.255.237.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A599C1ACDA2 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 08:31:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (75-172-99-249.tukw.qwest.net [75.172.99.249]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp2.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 05D1B2CA0B; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 08:31:54 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: "'Renzo Navas'" , References: In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 08:29:15 -0700 Message-ID: <02b401d10a82$e9fad090$bdf071b0$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQHzmWnDuHsbuRDVzRJZoTsl3JvQSJ4t0vIw Archived-At: Subject: Re: [COSE] comment for draft-ietf-cose-msg-06 X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 15:31:59 -0000 Thanks for the correction. Jim > -----Original Message----- > From: COSE [mailto:cose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Renzo Navas > Sent: Monday, October 19, 2015 7:57 AM > To: cose@ietf.org > Subject: [COSE] comment for draft-ietf-cose-msg-06 > > Hi Jim and all, > > Thanks Jim for this -great- document, I was reading it an came across with a > small typo, on section 10.1.1: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cose-msg-06#section-10.1.1 > > >10.1.1. Security Considerations > > When using AES-CCM the following restrictions MUST be enforced: > > On this section (10.1. AES GCM ) it's AES-GCM the cipher mode in question. > > > Thanks again, > have a good start of the week > > Renzo > > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose From nobody Tue Oct 20 02:06:32 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F28931B2FDB; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 02:06:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 bJXp_oFijw7P; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 02:06:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sesbmg23.ericsson.net (sesbmg23.ericsson.net [193.180.251.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DD031B2FE0; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 02:06:28 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-f79a26d00000149a-4c-562604120348 Received: from ESESSHC024.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sesbmg23.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id CA.4F.05274.21406265; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 11:06:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ESESSMB303.ericsson.se ([169.254.3.10]) by ESESSHC024.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.90]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 11:06:25 +0200 From: =?utf-8?B?R8O2cmFuIFNlbGFuZGVy?= To: "Ace@ietf.org" , "core@ietf.org" , "cose@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: OSCOAP version -03 Thread-Index: AQHRCxaYBgV53xaj7EGOeqPGeMhtCQ== Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:06:25 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.7.141117 x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.20] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrDLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvja4Qi1qYwdkmMYvv33qYLfa9Xc9s MW3rVFYHZo8lS34yBTBGcdmkpOZklqUW6dslcGUs2N/MVvBLsmLhuScsDYxLJLsYOTkkBEwk ujc1sEDYYhIX7q1n62Lk4hASOMooMenAB2YIZzGjxONtc9hBqtgEXCQeNDxiArFFBFIl9k/5 DdYtLCAtsXfyA3aIuILE9FmXoWr0JD5uv8oKYrMIqEocurUVrIZXwEKio6MfrIYRaPP3U2vA bGYBcYlbT+YzQVwkILFkz3lmCFtU4uXjf2BzRIFmrrzexAYRV5S4On05UD0HUK+mxPpd+hBj rCUOf50DNVJRYkr3Q6i1ghInZz5hmcAoOgvJtlkI3bOQdM9C0j0LSfcCRtZVjKLFqcVJuelG xnqpRZnJxcX5eXp5qSWbGIHRc3DLb9UdjJffOB5iFOBgVOLhfZCuGibEmlhWXJl7iFGag0VJ nLeZ6UGokEB6YklqdmpqQWpRfFFpTmrxIUYmDk6pBkbHfxPufIxnvpgi+fy885PfuYwpU9x6 ZWM2n6w/cSxvs+aC50tvhW2I3LRAcN5ibzaz7x+OveFdUsWlu+vqx4ePX1gp3fSz2j6DbWnR 2w0uZ0uvHrnIesG0qPmv3TxRgx3rFh7rbWy9q7RftKR4b6b0pe6Kl0ssgg673hDY2hEXuNrP V//SS+fTSizFGYmGWsxFxYkALoRKQH8CAAA= Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] OSCOAP version -03 X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:06:31 -0000 RGVhciBBQ0UsIENPUkUgYW5kIENPU0UgZmVsbG93cywNCg0KV2UgaGF2ZSB1cGRhdGVkIHRoZSBk cmFmdCBvbiBPYmplY3QgU2VjdXJpdHkgb2YgQ29BUDogVGhlIG1haW4gY29udGVudCBpcw0KdGhl IHNhbWUgYXMgcHJldmlvdXMgdmVyc2lvbiBidXQgdGhlIGRyYWZ0IGhhcyB1bmRlcmdvbmUgYSBs YXJnZQ0KcmVzdHJ1Y3R1cmluZyBmb3IgKGhvcGVmdWxseSkgaW1wcm92ZWQgcmVhZGVyIGV4cGVy aWVuY2UsIGluY2x1ZGluZyBzb21lDQpzaW1wbGlmaWNhdGlvbnMuIA0KDQpGb3IgZXhhbXBsZSwg dGhlIHR3byBDb0FQIG9wdGlvbnMgcHJvcG9zZWQgaW4gLTAyIGFyZSByZXBsYWNlZCB3aXRoIG9u ZQ0Kb3B0aW9uIGNhbGxlZCAiT2JqZWN0LVNlY3VyaXR5IiBpbmRpY2F0aW5nIHRoYXQgYSBDT1NF IG1lc3NhZ2UgaXMgaW5jbHVkZWQNCnRvIHByb3RlY3QgcmVsZXZhbnQgcGFydHMgb2YgdGhlIENv QVAgbWVzc2FnZS4gV2UgaGF2ZSBhbHNvIHVwZGF0ZWQgdGhlDQptZXNzYWdlIHNpemUgb3B0aW1p emF0aW9ucyBhbmQgY2FsY3VsYXRpb25zIGJhc2VkIG9uDQpkcmFmdC1pZXRmLWNvc2UtbXNnLTA1 Lg0KDQpDT1JFIGNoYWlyczogQ291bGQgd2UgaGF2ZSBhIHRpbWUgc2xvdCBhdCB0aGUgRjJGIHRv IG91dGxpbmUgdGhlIHVwZGF0ZXMNCmFuZCBhbHNvIGhhdmUgYSBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIGFib3V0IHdo YXQgQ29BUCBmZWF0dXJlcyB3ZSB3YW50IHRvIHByb3RlY3QNCmVuZC10by1lbmQ/DQoNCkNPU0Ug Y2hhaXJzOiBDb3VsZCB3ZSBoYXZlIGEgdGltZSBzbG90IGF0IHRoZSBGMkYgZm9yIGRpc2N1c3Np bmcgdGhlIENPU0UNCm1lc3NhZ2UgZm9ybWF0IGNvbnNpZGVyYXRpb25zIGluIHRoaXMgZHJhZnQ/ DQoNCg0KVGhhbmtzLA0KR8O2cmFuDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KT24gMjAxNS0xMC0xOSAyMDo0OSwgImlu dGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0c0BpZXRmLm9yZyIgPGludGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0c0BpZXRmLm9yZz4NCndyb3Rl Og0KDQo+DQo+QSBuZXcgdmVyc2lvbiBvZiBJLUQsIGRyYWZ0LXNlbGFuZGVyLWFjZS1vYmplY3Qt c2VjdXJpdHktMDMudHh0DQo+aGFzIGJlZW4gc3VjY2Vzc2Z1bGx5IHN1Ym1pdHRlZCBieSBHb2Vy YW4gU2VsYW5kZXIgYW5kIHBvc3RlZCB0byB0aGUNCj5JRVRGIHJlcG9zaXRvcnkuDQo+DQo+TmFt ZToJCWRyYWZ0LXNlbGFuZGVyLWFjZS1vYmplY3Qtc2VjdXJpdHkNCj5SZXZpc2lvbjoJMDMNCj5U aXRsZToJCU9iamVjdCBTZWN1cml0eSBvZiBDb0FQIChPU0NPQVApDQo+RG9jdW1lbnQgZGF0ZToJ MjAxNS0xMC0xOQ0KPkdyb3VwOgkJSW5kaXZpZHVhbCBTdWJtaXNzaW9uDQo+UGFnZXM6CQk0Mg0K PlVSTDogICAgICAgICAgICANCj5odHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9pbnRlcm5ldC1kcmFmdHMv ZHJhZnQtc2VsYW5kZXItYWNlLW9iamVjdC1zZWN1cml0eS0wMw0KPi50eHQNCj5TdGF0dXM6ICAg ICAgICAgDQo+aHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9kb2MvZHJhZnQtc2VsYW5kZXIt YWNlLW9iamVjdC1zZWN1cml0eS8NCj5IdG1saXplZDogICAgICAgDQo+aHR0cHM6Ly90b29scy5p ZXRmLm9yZy9odG1sL2RyYWZ0LXNlbGFuZGVyLWFjZS1vYmplY3Qtc2VjdXJpdHktMDMNCj5EaWZm OiAgICAgICAgICAgDQo+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvcmZjZGlmZj91cmwyPWRyYWZ0LXNl bGFuZGVyLWFjZS1vYmplY3Qtc2VjdXJpdHktMDMNCj4NCj5BYnN0cmFjdDoNCj4gICBUaGlzIG1l bW8gZGVmaW5lcyBPYmplY3QgU2VjdXJpdHkgb2YgQ29BUCAoT1NDT0FQKSwgYSBtZXRob2QgZm9y DQo+ICAgcHJvdGVjdGlvbiBvZiByZXF1ZXN0IGFuZCByZXNwb25zZSBtZXNzYWdlIGV4Y2hhbmdl cyBvZiB0aGUNCj4gICBDb25zdHJhaW5lZCBBcHBsaWNhdGlvbiBQcm90b2NvbCAoQ29BUCkgdXNp bmcgZGF0YSBvYmplY3Qgc2VjdXJpdHkuDQo+ICAgT1NDT0FQIHByb3ZpZGVzIGVuZC10by1lbmQg ZW5jcnlwdGlvbiwgaW50ZWdyaXR5IGFuZCByZXBsYXkNCj4gICBwcm90ZWN0aW9uIHRvIENvQVAg cGF5bG9hZCwgb3B0aW9ucyBhbmQgaGVhZGVyIGZpZWxkcywgYW5kIGEgc2VjdXJlDQo+ICAgYmlu ZGluZyBiZXR3ZWVuIENvQVAgcmVxdWVzdCBhbmQgcmVzcG9uc2UgbWVzc2FnZXMuICBUaGUgdXNl IG9mDQo+ICAgT1NDT0FQIGlzIHNpZ25hbGVkIHdpdGggdGhlIE9iamVjdC1TZWN1cml0eSBvcHRp b24sIGFsc28gZGVmaW5lZCBpbg0KPiAgIHRoaXMgbWVtby4NCj4NCj4gICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICANCj4gICAgICAgIA0KPg0KPg0KPlBsZWFzZSBub3RlIHRoYXQgaXQgbWF5IHRha2UgYSBjb3Vw bGUgb2YgbWludXRlcyBmcm9tIHRoZSB0aW1lIG9mDQo+c3VibWlzc2lvbg0KPnVudGlsIHRoZSBo dG1saXplZCB2ZXJzaW9uIGFuZCBkaWZmIGFyZSBhdmFpbGFibGUgYXQgdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcu DQo+DQo+VGhlIElFVEYgU2VjcmV0YXJpYXQNCj4NCg0K From nobody Wed Oct 21 08:14:59 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD3A01A6F12 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 08:14:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 8UeYMdvs9Z94 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 08:14:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu [18.7.68.36]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D96A51A1F16 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 08:14:56 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 12074424-f79106d000007367-d6-5627abef49a9 Received: from mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.35]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 11.8C.29543.FEBA7265; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 11:14:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id t9LFEskt007468 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 11:14:55 -0400 Received: from artemisia.richer.local (static-96-237-195-53.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [96.237.195.53]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as jricher@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id t9LFErQB004841 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 11:14:54 -0400 From: Justin Richer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 11:14:53 -0400 To: cose@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrKIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUixCmqrPt+tXqYwctlehbTtk5ldWD0WLLk J1MAYxSXTUpqTmZZapG+XQJXxs+7sgXrmCtuvzrP2MB4k6mLkZNDQsBE4tPfmywQtpjEhXvr 2boYuTiEBBYzSfy/+oUVwjnKKHHu7nyozFcmidmrHrKDtLAJqEpMX9MCNopZQF3iz7xLzBC2 tsSyha/BbGEBLYlH636zgdi8AlYSF+fMYgWxWYB6dz3qAlrNwSEiIChxt9McokRP4tWty6wQ F8lK7P79iGkCI98sJBtmIdkwC0nLAkbmVYyyKblVurmJmTnFqcm6xcmJeXmpRbrmermZJXqp KaWbGEEhxu6isoOx+ZDSIUYBDkYlHt4PC9XChFgTy4orcw8xSnIwKYny/lmhHibEl5SfUpmR WJwRX1Sak1p8iFGCg1lJhLe6GyjHm5JYWZValA+TkuZgURLn3fSDL0RIID2xJDU7NbUgtQgm K8PBoSTB67UKqFGwKDU9tSItM6cEIc3EwQkynAdo+EKQGt7igsTc4sx0iPwpRl2OBT9ur2US YsnLz0uVEuedDFIkAFKUUZoHNweUGhLeHjZ9xSgO9JYwrx9IFQ8wrcBNegW0hAlkySNVkCUl iQgpqQbG4n0yKf8cN4nNU5r/+4aMqfTxbZE7eZf7rnl17O+6bUn6f2+J9FQFfm5c+8GZqWfJ /673gXZxt5/PaS4UV9i4+d3mB4uFpqXMl7lq95Dr9bvuV/V9i3yrp3V/EP38w8hBOaJy76dF Byaukl3VoFIr+e9teJEFy91YwbYE711d88wvuLus7xZaqMRSnJFoqMVcVJwIACxGRtHoAgAA Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] Call for Presentations for IETF94 X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 15:14:59 -0000 Hi everyone, So far, the chairs have had two requests for presentations at the COSE = meeting of IETF94, which we will be accommodating along with discussion = on the current draft progress. We=E2=80=99re putting the agenda together = now, and we would like to know if anyone else has a topic that they=E2=80=99= d like to present and discuss at the upcoming face to face. =E2=80=94 Justin & Kepeng, your cose chairs= From nobody Wed Oct 21 14:18:49 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A6E81B30E8 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:18:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 kY9ojq5oMVMT for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:18:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1bon0786.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::1:786]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 688251B30DD for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:18:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=ofbGOhLtLAHGqXfJH70efyZHl6WYu6aPNG1gu2OvshY=; b=IFUtapOultg/z0sWzHRCkfoP+yatGOp6/ZoHKBPt4oth1pljQFt+AR2nMExnlinQ2I/MwYhzZwGEWDwPfaUaheWyCeh/WHEUxD5/pu1i2BkswK7a6z5USUppSjVz2H5/Hfj7NMjkeV8ubbO6ZVp8LrmG/ipqvkxeIm3nHH/50q4= Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.145) by BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.145) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:18:23 +0000 Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) by BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) with mapi id 15.01.0300.010; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:18:23 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: Justin Richer , "cose@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [COSE] Call for Presentations for IETF94 Thread-Index: AQHRDBNDHZ0ZXJW/9kOw8HaYTUGBkJ52c4Rw Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:18:23 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; x-originating-ip: [2001:4898:80e8:7::355] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR03MB442; 24:MNKX0zkKhJyzjwCQfk/o4kwXVLUHB4u2K44WIYvbJNtBS8hcIt7F1/MYrR6uhjVOF466KQap4PIoWxgU9zP21k2vQdQvPa0muBQeQy4PEHM=; 20:uNmAQJYlyoFxWWOjX/dl6T8Wb8bWPEJqREe7N6EKrkfIH0f7Y1S053dsM0eFdyR/rCOSSbSbdwyiDPfCXdwfEQ== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR03MB442; x-forefront-prvs: 073631BD3D x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(199003)(189002)(164054003)(377454003)(53754006)(13464003)(50986999)(77096005)(92566002)(15975445007)(54356999)(5008740100001)(64706001)(105586002)(101416001)(106116001)(102836002)(106356001)(76176999)(87936001)(2171001)(46102003)(33656002)(74316001)(40100003)(76576001)(122556002)(19580395003)(19580405001)(11100500001)(5005710100001)(2950100001)(2900100001)(10400500002)(86612001)(5002640100001)(5004730100002)(10290500002)(8990500004)(189998001)(10090500001)(107886002)(5003600100002)(86362001)(99286002)(2501003)(97736004)(5001770100001)(81156007)(3826002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR03MB442; H:BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 21 Oct 2015 21:18:23.3617 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR03MB442 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [COSE] Call for Presentations for IETF94 X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:18:47 -0000 SSB3b3VsZCBsaWtlIDIwIG1pbnV0ZXMgdG8gZGlzY3VzcyB0aGUgc3RhdHVzIG9mIG91dHN0YW5k aW5nIENPU0UgaXNzdWVzIC0gZXNwZWNpYWxseSB0aG9zZSBwZXJ0YWluaW5nIHRvICJrZWVwaW5n IHNpbXBsZSB0aGluZ3Mgc2ltcGxlIi4NCg0KCQkJCVRoYW5rcywNCgkJCQktLSBNaWtlDQoNCi0t LS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQpGcm9tOiBDT1NFIFttYWlsdG86Y29zZS1ib3VuY2Vz QGlldGYub3JnXSBPbiBCZWhhbGYgT2YgSnVzdGluIFJpY2hlcg0KU2VudDogV2VkbmVzZGF5LCBP Y3RvYmVyIDIxLCAyMDE1IDg6MTUgQU0NClRvOiBjb3NlQGlldGYub3JnDQpTdWJqZWN0OiBbQ09T RV0gQ2FsbCBmb3IgUHJlc2VudGF0aW9ucyBmb3IgSUVURjk0DQoNCkhpIGV2ZXJ5b25lLA0KDQpT byBmYXIsIHRoZSBjaGFpcnMgaGF2ZSBoYWQgdHdvIHJlcXVlc3RzIGZvciBwcmVzZW50YXRpb25z IGF0IHRoZSBDT1NFIG1lZXRpbmcgb2YgSUVURjk0LCB3aGljaCB3ZSB3aWxsIGJlIGFjY29tbW9k YXRpbmcgYWxvbmcgd2l0aCBkaXNjdXNzaW9uIG9uIHRoZSBjdXJyZW50IGRyYWZ0IHByb2dyZXNz LiBXZeKAmXJlIHB1dHRpbmcgdGhlIGFnZW5kYSB0b2dldGhlciBub3csIGFuZCB3ZSB3b3VsZCBs aWtlIHRvIGtub3cgaWYgYW55b25lIGVsc2UgaGFzIGEgdG9waWMgdGhhdCB0aGV54oCZZCBsaWtl IHRvIHByZXNlbnQgYW5kIGRpc2N1c3MgYXQgdGhlIHVwY29taW5nIGZhY2UgdG8gZmFjZS4NCg0K IOKAlCBKdXN0aW4gJiBLZXBlbmcsIHlvdXIgY29zZSBjaGFpcnMNCl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQpDT1NFIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KQ09TRUBp ZXRmLm9yZw0KaHR0cHM6Ly9uYTAxLnNhZmVsaW5rcy5wcm90ZWN0aW9uLm91dGxvb2suY29tLz91 cmw9aHR0cHMlM2ElMmYlMmZ3d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmclMmZtYWlsbWFuJTJmbGlzdGluZm8lMmZjb3Nl JTBhJmRhdGE9MDElN2MwMSU3Y01pY2hhZWwuSm9uZXMlNDBtaWNyb3NvZnQuY29tJTdjYzM2NTk1 YTIwNjAyNDEwYzZiY2IwOGQyZGEyYTY0NjAlN2M3MmY5ODhiZjg2ZjE0MWFmOTFhYjJkN2NkMDEx ZGI0NyU3YzEmc2RhdGE9U0l4SlJVTHN0Y0x2QVdXRXhEbnJyRDNGM0VSSU9pMTRMOE5pbktQclhy ayUzZA0K From nobody Wed Oct 21 14:29:25 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39F891B3131 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:29:24 -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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 Kl0ZNh6AtKiz for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:29:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yk0-x234.google.com (mail-yk0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::234]) (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 E3D751B3133 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:29:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by ykba4 with SMTP id a4so57615982ykb.3 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:29:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:mime-version:subject:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=7GaUykshc+fBTOhiQbHCu01yh8Rhz45OKLfi5FQvfvw=; b=Qk3cmVIFExXChE3dyJawLSaXwvUGdm6bUALpWlmXF46RkS9cl+76A7590SH3E2gewu gi5YoIShj6Ele6ZmdiO4UJHw5CuBZiEwPSe8PEBGTsPNPNTGFLkBfruzyur47K75Ut9A qgVTWKynbPOjiAU2q2e/7Kg0WLvuHBfchCz80CHT77UELv1+0u6cnmSxGe5/AMeNt1r2 WCNAtZ9IfKddGqcz8a5Y2qJlDKdWAukP7R6I1DYzxk6LLEojpKdlkcv7wH2YVLYaQteK ua7O8hz79BnzubhcZh48DiOee1KdAZRev66pKl4sNZ8H5BeVaQyWDgbtEzEsiIElYAvd N1bw== X-Received: by 10.129.70.197 with SMTP id t188mr8428412ywa.292.1445462960206; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:29:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.14] (pool-96-233-21-91.bstnma.east.verizon.net. [96.233.21.91]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u75sm7329864ywf.21.2015.10.21.14.29.18 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:29:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Kathleen Moriarty X-Google-Original-From: Kathleen Moriarty Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (12H143) In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 17:29:17 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <64713EE5-8109-42A0-A62F-ACF0B93780B8@gmail.com> References: To: Mike Jones Archived-At: Cc: Justin Richer , "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Call for Presentations for IETF94 X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:29:24 -0000 Wouldn't this be discussed with the existing draft? Why is a separate prese= ntation requested or is this another draft? Thanks, Kathleen=20 Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 21, 2015, at 5:18 PM, Mike Jones wrot= e: >=20 > I would like 20 minutes to discuss the status of outstanding COSE issues -= especially those pertaining to "keeping simple things simple". >=20 > Thanks, > -- Mike >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: COSE [mailto:cose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Justin Richer > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 8:15 AM > To: cose@ietf.org > Subject: [COSE] Call for Presentations for IETF94 >=20 > Hi everyone, >=20 > So far, the chairs have had two requests for presentations at the COSE mee= ting of IETF94, which we will be accommodating along with discussion on the c= urrent draft progress. We=E2=80=99re putting the agenda together now, and we= would like to know if anyone else has a topic that they=E2=80=99d like to p= resent and discuss at the upcoming face to face. >=20 > =E2=80=94 Justin & Kepeng, your cose chairs > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3a%2f%2fwww.iet= f.org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fcose%0a&data=3D01%7c01%7cMichael.Jones%40micros= oft.com%7cc36595a20602410c6bcb08d2da2a6460%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db4= 7%7c1&sdata=3DSIxJRULstcLvAWWExDnrrD3F3ERIOi14L8NinKPrXrk%3d > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose From nobody Wed Oct 21 14:41:29 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF0B71B31A3 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:41:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 LJGwvfzkVO7g for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:41:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0747.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::747]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD1C21B3197 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:41:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=4L7dFwiUUyKCO+O8aQuot8v6NHr5a2m8w72vKXAjRlo=; b=n2c4IdGryNrr/MmA0lBHxkt+Nmf3jmedWNZhayCIoScIcscXNFjUzL4UxMHx8tIGQ54QebSMRrBgJuzGtzMhp5kIur3GZCcym4T4J+jMwmN3kExMjUOe+la1aFZBliCStWehNegBiP0U7q6qjF2fEGbyDSJJaJvOawV45ubpcXA= Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.145) by BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.145) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.300.14; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:41:18 +0000 Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) by BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) with mapi id 15.01.0300.010; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:41:18 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: Kathleen Moriarty Thread-Topic: [COSE] Call for Presentations for IETF94 Thread-Index: AQHRDBNDHZ0ZXJW/9kOw8HaYTUGBkJ52c4RwgAADaYCAAAFTAA== Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:41:18 +0000 Message-ID: References: <64713EE5-8109-42A0-A62F-ACF0B93780B8@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <64713EE5-8109-42A0-A62F-ACF0B93780B8@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; x-originating-ip: [2001:4898:80e8:7::355] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR03MB442; 24:/xY8adaNJLNg3Dopa7rk0XYgnD4S7vvNx4zY6JhBbn9e+O+mhxFqHQckT23ZDcHwKUUXi9dkycSFlUJVGIhzLVAUlIgGWIO53IbCpT5DYFE=; 20:Vxz32IGDIM/a14O1N5LIyOejt3OjcKpd8ezzIQl9Po7l3GlzFlIAtJXo+KWFwj7GNtytd4fUaN2Weaqx9ST0+A== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR03MB442; x-forefront-prvs: 073631BD3D x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(53754006)(13464003)(24454002)(189002)(199003)(164054003)(8990500004)(5003600100002)(189998001)(10090500001)(110136002)(5005710100001)(11100500001)(5004730100002)(5002640100001)(10290500002)(2900100001)(2950100001)(10400500002)(86612001)(97736004)(81156007)(86362001)(99286002)(106356001)(102836002)(105586002)(106116001)(101416001)(46102003)(87936001)(76176999)(5003630100001)(50986999)(92566002)(77096005)(15975445007)(5008740100001)(64706001)(54356999)(19580395003)(122556002)(19580405001)(74316001)(33656002)(40100003)(76576001)(3826002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR03MB442; H:BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 21 Oct 2015 21:41:18.0445 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR03MB442 Archived-At: Cc: Justin Richer , "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Call for Presentations for IETF94 X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:41:28 -0000 VGhpcyBpcyBhIGZvbGxvdy11cCBvbiB0aGUgIktleSBJc3N1ZXMgYW5kIENob2ljZXMgZm9yIENP U0UiIGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL3Byb2NlZWRpbmdzLzkzL3NsaWRlcy9zbGlkZXMtOTMt Y29zZS03LnBkZiBwcmVzZW50YXRpb24gdGhhdCBJIG1hZGUgaW4gUHJhZ3VlIC0gbG9va2luZyBh dCB3aGljaCBpc3N1ZXMgd2VyZSBhZGRyZXNzZWQgYW5kIHdoaWNoIGFyZSBzdGlsbCBvdXRzdGFu ZGluZy4gIChNYW55IGFyZSBzdGlsbCBvdXRzdGFuZGluZy4pICBTb21lIG9mIHRoZSBpc3N1ZXMg cmFpc2VkIGluIHRoZSAiQUNFL0NPUkUgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnRzIG9uIENPU0UiIGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3 LmlldGYub3JnL3Byb2NlZWRpbmdzLzkzL3NsaWRlcy9zbGlkZXMtOTMtY29zZS02LnBkZiBwcmVz ZW50YXRpb24gaW4gUHJhZ3VlIHRoYXQgaGF2ZSBub3QgYmVlbiBhZGRyZXNzZWQgd2lsbCBhbHNv IGJlIGRpc2N1c3NlZC4gIFNwZWNpZmljIHJlc29sdXRpb25zIHdpbGwgYmUgcHJvcG9zZWQgaW4g dGhlIHByZXNlbnRhdGlvbi4NCg0KVGhlIHByZXNlbnRhdGlvbiBhbmQgaXNzdWVzIHBlcnRhaW4g dG8gdGhlIGV4aXN0aW5nIGRyYWZ0IC0gbm90IGFub3RoZXIgZHJhZnQuICBUaGlzIHByZXNlbnRh dGlvbiB3aWxsIGFsc28gcmVmZXIgdG8gYSBjb2xsZWN0aW9uIG9mIEdpdEh1YiBpc3N1ZXMgb24g dGhlIGV4aXN0aW5nIGRvY3VtZW50IHdoaWNoIEknbGwgYmUgZmlsaW5nIHNvIHRoYXQgdGhlc2Ug aXNzdWVzIGFyZSB0cmFja2VkIGFuZCBub3QgbG9zdC4NCg0KCQkJCS0tIE1pa2UNCg0KLS0tLS1P cmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCkZyb206IEthdGhsZWVuIE1vcmlhcnR5IFttYWlsdG86a2F0 aGxlZW4ubW9yaWFydHkuaWV0ZkBnbWFpbC5jb21dIA0KU2VudDogV2VkbmVzZGF5LCBPY3RvYmVy IDIxLCAyMDE1IDI6MjkgUE0NClRvOiBNaWtlIEpvbmVzIDxNaWNoYWVsLkpvbmVzQG1pY3Jvc29m dC5jb20+DQpDYzogSnVzdGluIFJpY2hlciA8anJpY2hlckBtaXQuZWR1PjsgY29zZUBpZXRmLm9y Zw0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFtDT1NFXSBDYWxsIGZvciBQcmVzZW50YXRpb25zIGZvciBJRVRGOTQN Cg0KV291bGRuJ3QgdGhpcyBiZSBkaXNjdXNzZWQgd2l0aCB0aGUgZXhpc3RpbmcgZHJhZnQ/ICBX aHkgaXMgYSBzZXBhcmF0ZSBwcmVzZW50YXRpb24gcmVxdWVzdGVkIG9yIGlzIHRoaXMgYW5vdGhl ciBkcmFmdD8NCg0KVGhhbmtzLA0KS2F0aGxlZW4gDQoNClNlbnQgZnJvbSBteSBpUGhvbmUNCg0K PiBPbiBPY3QgMjEsIDIwMTUsIGF0IDU6MTggUE0sIE1pa2UgSm9uZXMgPE1pY2hhZWwuSm9uZXNA bWljcm9zb2Z0LmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQo+IA0KPiBJIHdvdWxkIGxpa2UgMjAgbWludXRlcyB0byBk aXNjdXNzIHRoZSBzdGF0dXMgb2Ygb3V0c3RhbmRpbmcgQ09TRSBpc3N1ZXMgLSBlc3BlY2lhbGx5 IHRob3NlIHBlcnRhaW5pbmcgdG8gImtlZXBpbmcgc2ltcGxlIHRoaW5ncyBzaW1wbGUiLg0KPiAN Cj4gICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgVGhhbmtzLA0KPiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAtLSBNaWtlDQo+IA0K PiAtLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KPiBGcm9tOiBDT1NFIFttYWlsdG86Y29zZS1i b3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnXSBPbiBCZWhhbGYgT2YgSnVzdGluIFJpY2hlcg0KPiBTZW50OiBXZWRu ZXNkYXksIE9jdG9iZXIgMjEsIDIwMTUgODoxNSBBTQ0KPiBUbzogY29zZUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBT dWJqZWN0OiBbQ09TRV0gQ2FsbCBmb3IgUHJlc2VudGF0aW9ucyBmb3IgSUVURjk0DQo+IA0KPiBI aSBldmVyeW9uZSwNCj4gDQo+IFNvIGZhciwgdGhlIGNoYWlycyBoYXZlIGhhZCB0d28gcmVxdWVz dHMgZm9yIHByZXNlbnRhdGlvbnMgYXQgdGhlIENPU0UgbWVldGluZyBvZiBJRVRGOTQsIHdoaWNo IHdlIHdpbGwgYmUgYWNjb21tb2RhdGluZyBhbG9uZyB3aXRoIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gb24gdGhlIGN1 cnJlbnQgZHJhZnQgcHJvZ3Jlc3MuIFdl4oCZcmUgcHV0dGluZyB0aGUgYWdlbmRhIHRvZ2V0aGVy IG5vdywgYW5kIHdlIHdvdWxkIGxpa2UgdG8ga25vdyBpZiBhbnlvbmUgZWxzZSBoYXMgYSB0b3Bp YyB0aGF0IHRoZXnigJlkIGxpa2UgdG8gcHJlc2VudCBhbmQgZGlzY3VzcyBhdCB0aGUgdXBjb21p bmcgZmFjZSB0byBmYWNlLg0KPiANCj4g4oCUIEp1c3RpbiAmIEtlcGVuZywgeW91ciBjb3NlIGNo YWlycw0KPiBfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0K PiBDT1NFIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPiBDT1NFQGlldGYub3JnDQo+IGh0dHBzOi8vbmEwMS5zYWZl bGlua3MucHJvdGVjdGlvbi5vdXRsb29rLmNvbS8/dXJsPWh0dHBzJTNhJTJmJTJmd3d3LmlldGYu b3JnJTJmbWFpbG1hbiUyZmxpc3RpbmZvJTJmY29zZSUwYSZkYXRhPTAxJTdjMDElN2NNaWNoYWVs LkpvbmVzJTQwbWljcm9zb2Z0LmNvbSU3Y2MzNjU5NWEyMDYwMjQxMGM2YmNiMDhkMmRhMmE2NDYw JTdjNzJmOTg4YmY4NmYxNDFhZjkxYWIyZDdjZDAxMWRiNDclN2MxJnNkYXRhPVNJeEpSVUxzdGNM dkFXV0V4RG5yckQzRjNFUklPaTE0TDhOaW5LUHJYcmslM2QNCj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4gQ09TRSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj4gQ09T RUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBodHRwczovL25hMDEuc2FmZWxpbmtzLnByb3RlY3Rpb24ub3V0bG9vay5j b20vP3VybD1odHRwcyUzYSUyZiUyZnd3dy5pZXRmLm9yZyUyZm1haWxtYW4lMmZsaXN0aW5mbyUy ZmNvc2UmZGF0YT0wMSU3YzAxJTdjTWljaGFlbC5Kb25lcyU0MG1pY3Jvc29mdC5jb20lN2NmODE0 ODJjMjczMmI0YTU0NDExNzA4ZDJkYTVlYWVmNSU3YzcyZjk4OGJmODZmMTQxYWY5MWFiMmQ3Y2Qw MTFkYjQ3JTdjMSZzZGF0YT16djZxZ0NrVEolMmJrcSUyZnglMmZYc3RrT0hpZHYyZk5zRmVCR29E bXBxU0VScFVjJTNkDQo= From nobody Wed Oct 21 16:30:58 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4DBF1B3350 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 16:30:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 3B597PVZHjoK for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 16:30:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-1.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-1.mit.edu [18.9.25.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E752E1B2DAE for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 16:30:55 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 1209190c-f79b76d000007c4e-4b-5628202ed482 Received: from mailhub-auth-3.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.43]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-1.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id A1.48.31822.E2028265; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 19:30:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-3.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id t9LNUrY2009684; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 19:30:54 -0400 Received: from artemisia.richer.local (static-96-237-195-53.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [96.237.195.53]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as jricher@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id t9LNUpM4020209 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 21 Oct 2015 19:30:53 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) From: Justin Richer In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 19:30:48 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7D07A433-256A-4760-9755-1A59CEAA4ABC@mit.edu> References: <64713EE5-8109-42A0-A62F-ACF0B93780B8@gmail.com> To: Mike Jones X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFupnleLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42IR4hTV1tVT0Agz+HVf1mLa1qmsFg078y32 TvvE4sDssXPWXXaPJUt+Mnm07vjLHsAcxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJXxceoL5oJ5shUX13YzNjBu lOhi5OSQEDCRWLF5HguELSZx4d56ti5GLg4hgcVMEs+bvjFCOBsZJY7MbYDKPGSSmL3gPTNI C7OAusSfeZfAbF4BPYlXty6zgtjCAqYSh6Y8A4uzCahKTF/TwgRicwpES7Stngy2jgUovm7j U1aIOUkSn4/9YoSwtSWWLXwNNdNK4sHZbSwQizuZJOZcWAbWICKgI/H44jc2iLtlJXb/fsQ0 gVFwFpKbZiG5aRaSuQsYmVcxyqbkVunmJmbmFKcm6xYnJ+blpRbpGurlZpbopaaUbmIEh7Uk zw7GNweVDjEKcDAq8fBq/FcPE2JNLCuuzD3EKMnBpCTKu0BSI0yILyk/pTIjsTgjvqg0J7X4 EKMEB7OSCC+DFFCONyWxsiq1KB8mJc3BoiTOu+kHX4iQQHpiSWp2ampBahFMVoaDQ0mCV0oe qFGwKDU9tSItM6cEIc3EwQkynAdo+Ac5kOHFBYm5xZnpEPlTjLoc03Y/WMskxJKXn5cqJc57 B6RIAKQoozQPbg4oHSW8PWz6ilEc6C1h3jCQdTzAVAY36RXQEiagJQsfqYIsKUlESEk1MDJP OK3Iu+CtSPVtizd5/Kdu/dZ9LGKVn/Qytiqg/0blk1hfwXK/e2v59O/cLbLl+vRydt1a/6b7 RjOWmc+L/3A3g8tlwpSy78qPrxtltS/yZ125aon/siJT2Um2pzvTTa7OfZXe8p3TJNvBMubB NMYY0+WCTw8Kljid5/jpu79FwL46/NflI0osxRmJhlrMRcWJAAMHMoQiAwAA Archived-At: Cc: Kathleen Moriarty , "cose@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [COSE] Call for Presentations for IETF94 X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 23:30:58 -0000 The chairs have discussed this and agree with the AD that this should be = discussed with the current draft. We will be using the bulk of the time = to discuss open (and new) issues, led by the editor, Jim. We don=E2=80=99t= believe there is a need for a separate presentation for this purpose. Mike, please make sure your issues are all filed and posted to the list = prior to the meeting so that everyone has a chance to read and = potentially discuss them prior to the face to face. Thanks, =E2=80=94 Justin > On Oct 21, 2015, at 5:41 PM, Mike Jones = wrote: >=20 > This is a follow-up on the "Key Issues and Choices for COSE" = https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-cose-7.pdf = presentation that I made in Prague - looking at which issues were = addressed and which are still outstanding. (Many are still = outstanding.) Some of the issues raised in the "ACE/CORE requirements = on COSE" https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/slides/slides-93-cose-6.pdf = presentation in Prague that have not been addressed will also be = discussed. Specific resolutions will be proposed in the presentation. >=20 > The presentation and issues pertain to the existing draft - not = another draft. This presentation will also refer to a collection of = GitHub issues on the existing document which I'll be filing so that = these issues are tracked and not lost. >=20 > -- Mike >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Kathleen Moriarty [mailto:kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com]=20 > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 2:29 PM > To: Mike Jones > Cc: Justin Richer ; cose@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [COSE] Call for Presentations for IETF94 >=20 > Wouldn't this be discussed with the existing draft? Why is a separate = presentation requested or is this another draft? >=20 > Thanks, > Kathleen=20 >=20 > Sent from my iPhone >=20 >> On Oct 21, 2015, at 5:18 PM, Mike Jones = wrote: >>=20 >> I would like 20 minutes to discuss the status of outstanding COSE = issues - especially those pertaining to "keeping simple things simple". >>=20 >> Thanks, >> -- Mike >>=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: COSE [mailto:cose-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Justin Richer >> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 8:15 AM >> To: cose@ietf.org >> Subject: [COSE] Call for Presentations for IETF94 >>=20 >> Hi everyone, >>=20 >> So far, the chairs have had two requests for presentations at the = COSE meeting of IETF94, which we will be accommodating along with = discussion on the current draft progress. We=E2=80=99re putting the = agenda together now, and we would like to know if anyone else has a = topic that they=E2=80=99d like to present and discuss at the upcoming = face to face. >>=20 >> =E2=80=94 Justin & Kepeng, your cose chairs >> _______________________________________________ >> COSE mailing list >> COSE@ietf.org >> = https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3a%2f%2fwww.iet= f.org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fcose%0a&data=3D01%7c01%7cMichael.Jones%40micr= osoft.com%7cc36595a20602410c6bcb08d2da2a6460%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd01= 1db47%7c1&sdata=3DSIxJRULstcLvAWWExDnrrD3F3ERIOi14L8NinKPrXrk%3d >> _______________________________________________ >> COSE mailing list >> COSE@ietf.org >> = https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttps%3a%2f%2fwww.iet= f.org%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fcose&data=3D01%7c01%7cMichael.Jones%40microso= ft.com%7cf81482c2732b4a54411708d2da5eaef5%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db= 47%7c1&sdata=3Dzv6qgCkTJ%2bkq%2fx%2fXstkOHidv2fNsFeBGoDmpqSERpUc%3d From nobody Wed Oct 28 21:22:04 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC4EC1B64AB for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 21:22:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.8 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 OEof5-Zu3R8w for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 21:22:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp4.pacifier.net (smtp4.pacifier.net [64.255.237.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 713541B649B for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 21:22:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hebrews (unknown [64.122.12.145]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp4.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BCD0838EF3 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 21:22:00 -0700 (PDT) From: "Jim Schaad" To: Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 21:19:13 -0700 Message-ID: <001401d11200$f8590aa0$e90b1fe0$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 thread-index: AdESAMBMFQbEW9ONRAGkdU0LUoomRw== Content-Language: en-us Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] Open Issue List X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 04:22:02 -0000 If there are specific issues that people want to have me put in the presentation for Yokohama, please either send them to the mailing list or better yet put them into the issue tracker https://github.com/cose-wg/cose-issues/issues so that I don't lose track of them. Jim From nobody Fri Oct 30 18:24:31 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D3AC1ACE60 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 18:24:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 tY5Ovt3LBOeE for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 18:24:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu (dmz-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu [18.9.25.13]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79C681ACE5B for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 18:24:28 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: 1209190d-f79766d000002fec-f2-5634184af547 Received: from mailhub-auth-2.mit.edu ( [18.7.62.36]) (using TLS with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-2.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 66.B6.12268.B4814365; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 21:24:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) by mailhub-auth-2.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id t9V1OQ7Y026274; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 21:24:26 -0400 Received: from [10.0.0.51] (c-98-207-155-86.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [98.207.155.86] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as jricher@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.12.4) with ESMTP id t9V1ONSi011467 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 30 Oct 2015 21:24:25 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) From: Justin Richer In-Reply-To: <001401d11200$f8590aa0$e90b1fe0$@augustcellars.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 18:24:22 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <59AEB671-0BBB-47AE-B743-574373ECA13E@mit.edu> References: <001401d11200$f8590aa0$e90b1fe0$@augustcellars.com> To: Jim Schaad X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmphleLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42IRYrdT0fWWMAkzWN3BYTFt61RWi9XTv7M5 MHlsnDOdzWPJkp9MAUxRXDYpqTmZZalF+nYJXBl3b25hKXjLVvH/1Hr2Bsb9rF2MnBwSAiYS +w5uY4KwxSQu3FvP1sXIxSEksJhJYs3tG0wQzkZGibttJ1kgnLtMEq9fnGcBaWEWUJf4M+8S M4jNK6An8erWZbCxwgLKEoe3PAOz2QRUJaavaQFbwSngIPH+4F1GEJsFKL7k6lwmiDmCEqsb J7FD2NoSyxa+BprJATTTSuLSPyWQsJCAvcTCO5/BRooArd26+ibU1bISu38/YprAKDgLyUWz kFw0C8nUBYzMqxhlU3KrdHMTM3OKU5N1i5MT8/JSi3SN9HIzS/RSU0o3MYICmFOSdwfju4NK hxgFOBiVeHg1thuHCbEmlhVX5h5ilORgUhLllWQwCRPiS8pPqcxILM6ILyrNSS0+xCjBwawk wnuDByjHm5JYWZValA+TkuZgURLn3fSDL0RIID2xJDU7NbUgtQgmK8PBoSTB6y4O1ChYlJqe WpGWmVOCkGbi4AQZzgM03FIMZHhxQWJucWY6RP4Uoy7Hgh+31zIJseTl56VKifN+BSkSACnK KM2DmwNKPEnnZ4e9YhQHekuYVxZkHQ8wacFNegW0hAloicgeQ5AlJYkIKakGRjahCb8iVO5q W/HOKzyl9PaYiGoFl68Rh+CdGIUovrNr9k6fEvI8wMPjWdRZzp0q0iZ6cYuN2hZx8/VeP+P2 SbCiMm9psUqJYgdDNJt52bQQpVOSJoKTt6vIsIQvqr+ZsSjFUPhUzY9Y0Y/C7+blXu2fu/Hb 0TCuDSedbk64W5G8VuzFWw0dJZbijERDLeai4kQAQ0SLzRcDAAA= Archived-At: Cc: cose@ietf.org Subject: Re: [COSE] Open Issue List X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 01:24:30 -0000 As a reminder, we=E2=80=99ll be having a lot of discussion during the = face to face about the current messages draft and open issues, and we = hope for the discussion to drive conclusions forward. Please raise = issues now so that we can all be prepared to discuss them next week. Thank you, =E2=80=94 Justin, your COSE chair > On Oct 28, 2015, at 9:19 PM, Jim Schaad = wrote: >=20 > If there are specific issues that people want to have me put in the > presentation for Yokohama, please either send them to the mailing = list or > better yet put them into the issue tracker > https://github.com/cose-wg/cose-issues/issues so that I don't lose = track of > them. >=20 > Jim >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > COSE mailing list > COSE@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose From nobody Sat Oct 31 15:32:10 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ED941B3E25 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 15:32:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 OzLGtMK6mH7C for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 15:32:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D78A41B3E24 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 15:32:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 15:32:06 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1446330726; bh=CQEvUSn01hUEcPWi+9YDjs50QmCWnLaO2ZWxXBiuzHo=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=CSInLUDC8wnW4yIV1woeVzBnokeCsi0jOM5GEiKnpwf+yyYbgqOQ9zj0QxbtBVC9R GMQN5dAiciDmfSxUkJUD74OF4fN/Dkrbufyo6WCUUA+bAtybUcp4EMnqvdbbi/c8ZG XgC3RlBqSusBoicmnBE5R85qIGmmMdWiAuvfKTaY= From: Jim Schaad To: cose-wg/cose-issues Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_563541665bfd1_20f13fe8f4bff2bc28381d"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: jimsch X-GitHub-Recipient: cose-ietf X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: cose@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [COSE] [cose-issues] Remove JOSE commentary (#7) X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: cose-wg/cose-issues List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 22:32:09 -0000 ----==_mimepart_563541665bfd1_20f13fe8f4bff2bc28381d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #7. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/cose-wg/cose-issues/issues/7#event-451216157 ----==_mimepart_563541665bfd1_20f13fe8f4bff2bc28381d Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #7.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_563541665bfd1_20f13fe8f4bff2bc28381d-- From nobody Sat Oct 31 23:05:36 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 619191B658B for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:05:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 4Dz40sHKWkut for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:05:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0145.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43E3A1B66DA for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:05:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=bRE8VsBrIn47R3BLA8ItEZtLZcBQjpbrHeJJYareX7s=; b=bA2hmpD7BXJThEVz+NPzN3IPQxaueSggSpbuxnXTgYREKFzFW6PUYCi29CcUqI+Cflzy3loP3cWo7qGPz3m6RiK734TmqvDXFYeg3JWtdbvKNqK39warUH52ax8GG9ZjvIku35CwA+8Kw8BzSIliT6NsQUNkchTigmLu/x84yHE= Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.145) by BY2PR03MB441.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.142) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.306.13; Sun, 1 Nov 2015 06:05:30 +0000 Received: from BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) by BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.145]) with mapi id 15.01.0306.003; Sun, 1 Nov 2015 06:05:30 +0000 From: Mike Jones To: "'cose@ietf.org'" Thread-Topic: Pull request addressing nits in draft-ietf-cose-msg-06 Thread-Index: AdEUaw3hkvnX/8ctQSO3SsQiJ9AyAA== Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2015 06:05:28 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Michael.Jones@microsoft.com; x-originating-ip: [12.130.119.130] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR03MB441; 5:C+6EH5X4GxL0VeWVTH6fvY+v3JIYstG7IUH5j/gHYJY95Vm6QWtxU3zSXjQqI+U5ixg6ZbOQIMx8of4QRoBnov/5mfrv5HMJYUiW9mUEnInC/SAPbAMIsppbRIhc600MSrp42xd5XkcezvO6ceQg3g==; 24:1XxwZD6y2hvIJb0W6Z8L4g+bJIqq3YYTzy9i7jNLNG/uectdFSHTp2hk1M+dFpjP5bk1zfrcaqxGnMpp/NsG2tK+34Dc3uPZiq3yzoC7cgE=; 20:DPflGWPXxv4NcGHaAr02EspMDhKA/PBXI443vra4EpeVps6VHLg/uRgMA562X1Kz3han5cU8F0YGHw2mHizc4A== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(108003899814671); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425024)(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(520078)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046)(61426024)(61427024); SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; x-forefront-prvs: 07473990A5 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(199003)(189002)(450100001)(97736004)(77096005)(101416001)(81156007)(19625215002)(66066001)(16236675004)(33656002)(8990500004)(5004730100002)(5007970100001)(99286002)(102836002)(15975445007)(10090500001)(19617315012)(2900100001)(19300405004)(76576001)(230783001)(86612001)(87936001)(92566002)(5005710100001)(54356999)(19580395003)(19609705001)(86362001)(50986999)(5002640100001)(122556002)(110136002)(5008740100001)(11100500001)(40100003)(10400500002)(10290500002)(189998001)(107886002)(74316001)(5001960100002)(105586002)(106356001)(229853001)(5003600100002)(491001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR03MB441; H:BY2PR03MB442.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BY2PR03MB4426DCF006F0490297C36FBF52D0BY2PR03MB442namprd_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 01 Nov 2015 06:05:28.3608 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR03MB441 Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] Pull request addressing nits in draft-ietf-cose-msg-06 X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2015 06:05:35 -0000 --_000_BY2PR03MB4426DCF006F0490297C36FBF52D0BY2PR03MB442namprd_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I did a complete read of draft-ietf-cose-msg-06 on the plane from Seattle t= o Tokyo. I've checked in the pull request https://github.com/cose-wg/cose-= spec/pull/93 that addresses the wording and grammar nits I ran across. I a= lso wrote up issue descriptions for all the substantive issues I encountere= d. I'll now be checking those into the tracker, subject to delays in my co= nnectivity caused by my imminent landing in Tokyo and travel to my hotel an= d Yokohama. Looking forward to seeing many of you soon! -- Mike --_000_BY2PR03MB4426DCF006F0490297C36FBF52D0BY2PR03MB442namprd_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I did a complete read of draft-ietf-cose-msg-06 on t= he plane from Seattle to Tokyo.  I’ve checked in the pull reques= t https://github.com= /cose-wg/cose-spec/pull/93 that addresses the wording and grammar nits = I ran across.  I also wrote up issue descriptions for all the substant= ive issues I encountered.  I’ll now be checking those into the tracker, subject to delays in my connectivity caus= ed by my imminent landing in Tokyo and travel to my hotel and Yokohama.

 

Looking forward to seeing many of you soon!

 

        &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p; -- Mike

 

--_000_BY2PR03MB4426DCF006F0490297C36FBF52D0BY2PR03MB442namprd_-- From nobody Sat Oct 31 23:17:17 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C74B61B6800 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:17:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.641 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.641 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 lTMx5GZZEitN for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:17:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext1.iad.github.net [192.30.252.192]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F7971B67FE for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:17:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:17:11 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1446358631; bh=O6fisBC6WkgnMM9cKITWLG0ymqdZTw1i8dzo6iNrV/I=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=EW9OUYtG9iMYTJ7R121Cijlt2/tiuGw1lWXE/FZy61ByHSVi1+aXrf+2ILLUrOOUE kkK47TbbT8n2QodTGumrljqpA8a5Q4HM5opsnNGuwHIRjaGnyflCgKJYjVZGHCQD6u U2q5WFrrJ1UF7oIBnZBfrls8KzdGpQbc6gEyO3Vo= From: Mike Jones To: cose-wg/cose-issues Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5635ae672a97b_7ea63f7e5f0f72c010285"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: selfissued X-GitHub-Recipient: cose-ietf X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: cose@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] =?utf-8?q?=5Bcose-issues=5D_Move_=E2=80=9Csequence_number?= =?utf-8?b?4oCdIHZhbHVlIHRvIHRoZSBwYXlsb2FkICgjMTQp?= X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: cose-wg/cose-issues List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2015 06:17:16 -0000 ----==_mimepart_5635ae672a97b_7ea63f7e5f0f72c010285 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Like =E2=80=9Ccreation time=E2=80=9D, the =E2=80=9Csequence number=E2=80=9D= header parameter defined in Section 3.1 is a non-cryptographic applicati= on-defined attribute, and so should be defined in a companion CBOR payloa= d definitions specification, if at all. Only cryptographic-relevant head= er parameters should be defined by COSE. The text =E2=80=9CThe use of th= is parameter is application specific=E2=80=9D is the giveaway that this d= oesn=E2=80=99t belong here. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/cose-wg/cose-issues/issues/14= ----==_mimepart_5635ae672a97b_7ea63f7e5f0f72c010285 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Like =E2=80=9Ccreation time=E2=80=9D, the =E2=80=9Csequence number=E2=80= =9D header parameter defined in Section 3.1 is a non-cryptographic applic= ation-defined attribute, and so should be defined in a companion CBOR pay= load definitions specification, if at all. Only cryptographic-relevant h= eader parameters should be defined by COSE. The text =E2=80=9CThe use of= this parameter is application specific=E2=80=9D is the giveaway that thi= s doesn=E2=80=99t belong here.

&m= dash;
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.3D""

----==_mimepart_5635ae672a97b_7ea63f7e5f0f72c010285-- From nobody Sat Oct 31 23:18:17 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8EB71B6819 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:18:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.908 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 3_Y0zEUuztZY for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:18:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext1.iad.github.net [192.30.252.192]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DD651B6818 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:18:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:18:13 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1446358693; bh=61jbCf0Dwmri3TQUGWI3jjxOAK8tlzeHM1Mv0QPo7kg=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=sZOr7kZlCuyZjFDsUIcYcGkxyIT/zSzbUOrQxKGe+7TaKtbeYepSfGAqmp60vthL8 vD/+ur7CFW7R17JHs7PpeBKtVgHsD/4m25fz36k7Hx/t/fN5fI1XIUjNwc1EON3UVc 1VtFqk6kePj65nCdlZ06IyFhzQpBjLco+1LCnr1c= From: Mike Jones To: cose-wg/cose-issues Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5635aea5bc8f0_7c023f966b0eb2bc5198f"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: selfissued X-GitHub-Recipient: cose-ietf X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: cose@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] [cose-issues] Remove example features not implemented in the specification (#15) X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: cose-wg/cose-issues List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2015 06:18:17 -0000 ----==_mimepart_5635aea5bc8f0_7c023f966b0eb2bc5198f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The description of the signing structure in Section 4 includes this text = =E2=80=9CExamples of parameters about the content would be the type of co= ntent, when the content was created, and who created the content.=E2=80=9D= This triggered this comment by Hannes: =E2=80=9CEnsure that the list of= examples only includes items which are implemented in this specification= . Check the other places where such lists occur and ensure that they also= follow this rule.=E2=80=9D I agree with Hannes that this sentence should be removed, since the speci= fication doesn=E2=80=99t define these parameters. Another reason to remo= ve these examples is that they are examples of payload content, not crypt= ographic parameters. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/cose-wg/cose-issues/issues/15= ----==_mimepart_5635aea5bc8f0_7c023f966b0eb2bc5198f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The description of the signing structure in Section 4 includes this te= xt =E2=80=9CExamples of parameters about the content would be the type of= content, when the content was created, and who created the content.=E2=80= =9D This triggered this comment by Hannes: =E2=80=9CEnsure that the list= of examples only includes items which are implemented in this specificat= ion. Check the other places where such lists occur and ensure that they a= lso follow this rule.=E2=80=9D

I agree with Hannes that this sentence should be removed, since the sp= ecification doesn=E2=80=99t define these parameters. Another reason to r= emove these examples is that they are examples of payload content, not cr= yptographic parameters.

&m= dash;
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.3D""

----==_mimepart_5635aea5bc8f0_7c023f966b0eb2bc5198f-- From nobody Sat Oct 31 23:19:17 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: cose@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAF811B6839 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:19:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.908 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 SRUiCoQCQ4Gk for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:19:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext3.iad.github.net [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED61D1B6838 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:19:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:19:13 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1446358753; bh=rGOeR2KZbaSCfDisvMfasBAtVIJXWl8OJh2WamWPjF8=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=zj1Iq9g7ENj67Dnx8u9bqPObopJWhuWlvHLtV9LfnM6/L5fydTlKBm6NdO1DMZUIX FbbgsURW+ZbWU19L+PLUAJxDH08ovzoQMcF5GXJDw+h6618x71zgn0m1HrQaU6n4Ak tkCx4GOdWWiw4mxwTYX9fCAOi8U3EoN0rNQ6fsTc= From: Mike Jones To: cose-wg/cose-issues Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5635aee14a775_57453fb2b3e5f2b87167b"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: selfissued X-GitHub-Recipient: cose-ietf X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: cose@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: [COSE] [cose-issues] Are there enough use cases for external_aad to warrant its inclusion? (#16) X-BeenThere: cose@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: cose-wg/cose-issues List-Id: CBOR Object Signing and Encryption List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2015 06:19:16 -0000 ----==_mimepart_5635aee14a775_57453fb2b3e5f2b87167b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The =E2=80=9Cexternal_aad=E2=80=9D field appears in the Sig_structure, En= c_structure, and MAC_structure. Many other cryptographic specs have gott= en along fine without this, and are simpler as a result. Is its inclusio= n warranted by common use cases, or is this an edge case not satisfying t= he 80/20 rule for inclusion? The simpler way of achieving this is to inc= lude these values as part of the payload. Note also that some places in the spec prohibit supplying this value. Fo= r instance, 5.4 (Encryption algorithm for AE algorithms) includes the ins= truction =E2=80=9CVerify that there was no external additional authentica= ted data supplied for this operation.=E2=80=9D That makes me think that = having external_aad at all is a likely source of implementation and usage= errors and interoperability problems. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/cose-wg/cose-issues/issues/16= ----==_mimepart_5635aee14a775_57453fb2b3e5f2b87167b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The =E2=80=9Cexternal_aad=E2=80=9D field appears in the Sig_structure,= Enc_structure, and MAC_structure. Many other cryptographic specs have g= otten along fine without this, and are simpler as a result. Is its inclu= sion warranted by common use cases, or is this an edge case not satisfyin= g the 80/20 rule for inclusion? The simpler way of achieving this is to = include these values as part of the payload.

Note also that some places in the spec prohibit supplying this value. = For instance, 5.4 (Encryption algorithm for AE algorithms) includes the = instruction =E2=80=9CVerify that there was no external additional authent= icated data supplied for this operation.=E2=80=9D That makes me think th= at having external_aad at all is a likely source of implementation and us= age errors and interoperability problems.

&m= dash;
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.3D""

----==_mimepart_5635aee14a775_57453fb2b3e5f2b87167b--