Subject: [Roll] [roll] #144: Missing discussion of link encryption and group keys

From: "roll issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 15:58:07 -0000

#144: Missing discussion of link encryption and group keys

 Add a discussion as to when it is more advantageous to use link encryption
 or group keys. In the case that a network consists of both highly
 security-relevant and well-protected devices (such as alarm systems), and
 non-security relevant and not so well-protected devices (such as TV
 remotes), group keying means that either the remote must be as well-
 protected as the alarm system, or the entire network must be rekeyed if
 the remote is lost.  I don’t whether or not it would be necessary to give
 any MUST or SHOULD recommendations, but it would be helpful to give the
 reader an understanding of the issues involved when making decisions about
 link encryption versus group keys. This is not addressed in any of the
 documents cited at the beginning of the security considerations.

-- 
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
 Reporter:                           |      Owner:  draft-ietf-roll-
  [email-masked]      |  applicability-home-
     Type:  defect                   |  [email-masked]
 Priority:  major                    |     Status:  new
Component:  applicability-home-      |  Milestone:
  building                           |    Version:
 Severity:  Active WG Document       |   Keywords:  Security Review
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/trac/ticket/144>
roll <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/>