From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Fri Jul 01 12:12:55 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DoO8M-00048y-W2 for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 12:12:55 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA11021 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 12:12:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 665183A409; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 16:12:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from vandyke.com (mail.vandyke.com [204.134.9.1]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0F1C3A406 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 16:12:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (HELO [0.0.0.0]) by vandyke.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 7623514; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 10:12:44 -0600 Message-ID: <42C56CAF.2070204@vandyke.com> Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 10:17:51 -0600 From: Joseph Galbraith User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sara Golemon Cc: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Subject: Re: draft-ietf-secsh-filexfer Change to rename op in version 5 References: <00a501c5736d$623ecec0$5c8be5a9@ohr.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: <00a501c5736d$623ecec0$5c8be5a9@ohr.berkeley.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sara Golemon wrote: > I got tripped up by some vague wording in the changelog covering differences > between version 4 and version 5, specifically: > > o Add support for better control of the rename operation. > > > After looking through implementation sources, I found that this refers to > the addition of the flags parameter to FXP_RENAME. > > byte SSH_FXP_RENAME > uint32 request-id > string oldpath [UTF-8] > string newpath [UTF-8] > uint32 flags > > To avoid others being confused by this I'd like to propose a change to the > changelog entry's wording: > > o Add flags parameter to the rename operation to control rename behavior. I'll make this change... Thanks, Joseph From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Fri Jul 01 12:15:41 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DoOB3-0004mW-JQ for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 12:15:41 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA11420 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 12:15:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 181433A44F; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 16:15:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from vandyke.com (mail.vandyke.com [204.134.9.1]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 739823A3B4 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 16:15:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (HELO [0.0.0.0]) by vandyke.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.7) with ESMTP id 7623525 for ietf-ssh@netbsd.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 10:15:35 -0600 Message-ID: <42C56D5A.8000602@vandyke.com> Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 10:20:42 -0600 From: Joseph Galbraith User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "ietf-ssh@netbsd.org" Subject: SFTP status... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I believe I have all outstanding issues taken care of in the sftp draft ... (I have to refind the issue tracker info so I can check that, and close resolved issues.) There probably remains a lot of 'syntatical' work that needs to be done... I know it needs to be run through a spell checker (I am the world's worst speller.) So if anyone knows of some thing that needs to be done, now is the time to pipe up and say "here!" Thanks, Joseph From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Sat Jul 02 05:43:19 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DoeWs-0001qL-N0 for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 02 Jul 2005 05:43:18 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA26511 for ; Sat, 2 Jul 2005 05:43:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 0386D3A3C7; Sat, 2 Jul 2005 09:43:11 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from blaster.systems.pipex.net (blaster.systems.pipex.net [62.241.163.7]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 350643A3A9 for ; Sat, 2 Jul 2005 09:43:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pc6 (1Cust235.tnt105.lnd4.gbr.da.uu.net [213.116.58.235]) by blaster.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with SMTP id D6B72E0000C5 for ; Sat, 2 Jul 2005 10:13:29 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <00f601c57edd$df4d8980$0601a8c0@pc6> Reply-To: "Tom Petch" From: "Tom Petch" To: References: Subject: 'DSSH' Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 10:12:07 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Has anyone ever looked at the possibility of a DSSH comparable to a DTLS, ie adding a shim layer to enable SSH to work over an unreliable transport, such as UDP? Tom Petch ps If you are familiar with the isms list, you will know where this query comes from:-) From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Thu Jul 07 07:33:15 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DqUd1-0000lo-Ow for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 07:33:15 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA26004 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 07:33:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 2326A3A3DB; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 11:33:06 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from ppsw-9.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-9.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.139]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA2A73A3A9 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 11:33:03 +0000 (UTC) X-Cam-SpamDetails: Not scanned X-Cam-AntiVirus: No virus found X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Received: from draco.cus.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.18]:47127) by ppsw-9.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.139]:25) with esmtp id 1DqUcn-0004e8-V9 (Exim 4.51) for ietf-ssh@netbsd.org (return-path ); Thu, 07 Jul 2005 12:33:01 +0100 Received: from bjh21 (helo=localhost) by draco.cus.cam.ac.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1DqUcn-0000u5-Gz for ietf-ssh@netbsd.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 12:33:01 +0100 Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 12:33:01 +0100 (BST) From: Ben Harris To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Subject: draft-harris-ssh-rsa-kex-02 and a possible future change Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list I've uploaded a new version of my RSA KEX draft. Notable changes are: 1: Using SHA-512 in place of SHA-256. This is largely because I've got the impression that -dh-group-exchange is heading in the direction of using SHA-512, and it seems silly to require implementations to support both SHA-256 and SHA-512. Plus of course it gives us headroom in case decent collision attacks are found against the higher SHAs. 2: Including the encrypted secret in the data hashed to generate the exchange hash. This should make it much harder for a client to generate hash collisions, since they'd need to generate K such that K and its RSA encryption between them generate a collision. I conjecture that for reasonable RSA key sizes this is infeasible. I don't imagine that either of these will be controversial. I'd like to make another change, to move the transmission of K_S, the server's host key, from SSH_MSG_KEXRSA_DONE to SSH_MSG_KEXRSA_PUBKEY. The reason for this would be to ensure that even if the server can change its key (which I can imagine being possible for some kinds of certificate), it can't use this to mount a collision attack on the exchange hash because it doesn't know what secret the client is going to send. While this is rather different from the way the current KEX methods work, I can't imagine it being any more difficult for server implementations. Would any client imeplementors find it a problem? -- Ben Harris From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Thu Jul 07 10:57:51 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DqXoz-0007PO-HW for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 10:57:51 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA14963 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 10:57:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 8B79E3A660; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 14:57:42 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Received: from Sparkle.Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA (Sparkle.Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA [216.46.5.7]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C38603A39D for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 14:57:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (from mouse@localhost) by Sparkle.Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA01707; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 10:57:33 -0400 (EDT) From: der Mouse Message-Id: <200507071457.KAA01707@Sparkle.Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Erik-Conspiracy: There is no Conspiracy - and if there were I wouldn't be part of it anyway. X-Message-Flag: Microsoft: the company who gave us the zombie armies. Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 10:45:45 -0400 (EDT) To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Subject: Re: draft-harris-ssh-rsa-kex-02 and a possible future change In-Reply-To: References: Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > I've uploaded a new version of my RSA KEX draft. > > 1: Using SHA-512 in place of SHA-256. I'm not sure I like this. SHA-256 is reasonably good for 32-bit machines; SHA-512 (and SHA-384) are basically 64-bit algorithms, calling for eight 64-bit temporaries in their core loops. I think this change will disproportionately hurt exactly those machines where your kex is most beneficial - old, slow, half-lung machines, which are usually 32-bit. > Plus of course it gives us headroom in case decent collision > attacks are found against the higher SHAs. True, though I'd prefer to address this by defining variants using block-cipher-based hash functions. > 2: Including the encrypted secret in the data hashed to generate the > exchange hash. My reaction here is basically "shrug". I don't really see the hazard in the client managing to generate two sessions with the same exchange hash in the first place. > I'd like to make another change, to move the transmission of K_S, the > server's host key, from SSH_MSG_KEXRSA_DONE to SSH_MSG_KEXRSA_PUBKEY. > [...]. Would any client imeplementors find it a problem? Tentatively, I wouldn't. I'll have to look at my code, though, and make sure I do indeed have (or can easily arrange to have) the host key at hand at that point. /~\ The ASCII der Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Thu Jul 07 14:34:47 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DqbCx-0005Wv-0a for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 14:34:47 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05102 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 14:34:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 0CBC83A3B5; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 18:34:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from chiark.greenend.org.uk (chiark.greenend.org.uk [193.201.200.170]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E90CB3A394 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 18:34:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by chiark.greenend.org.uk (Debian Exim 3.35 #1) with local (return-path bjharris@chiark.greenend.org.uk) id 1DqbCi-0002Mi-00; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 19:34:32 +0100 From: Ben Harris To: mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA, ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Subject: Re: draft-harris-ssh-rsa-kex-02 and a possible future change In-Reply-To: <200507071457.KAA01707@Sparkle.Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA> References: <200507071457.KAA01707@Sparkle.Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA> Organization: Linux Unlimited Message-Id: Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 19:34:32 +0100 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list In article <200507071457.KAA01707@Sparkle.Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA> you write: >> I've uploaded a new version of my RSA KEX draft. >> > >> 1: Using SHA-512 in place of SHA-256. > >I'm not sure I like this. SHA-256 is reasonably good for 32-bit >machines; SHA-512 (and SHA-384) are basically 64-bit algorithms, >calling for eight 64-bit temporaries in their core loops. > >I think this change will disproportionately hurt exactly those machines >where your kex is most beneficial - old, slow, half-lung machines, >which are usually 32-bit. You're right. On a convenient slow machine (50MHzish ARM7500FE), a 2048-bit RSA public operation takes about 1/3s and a 1024-byte SHA-512 takes about 1/2s. I haven't got a convenient SHA-256 implementation, but looking at the spec it's a lot friendlier to small systems. I'll reverse that change. >> 2: Including the encrypted secret in the data hashed to generate the >> exchange hash. > >My reaction here is basically "shrug". I don't really see the hazard >in the client managing to generate two sessions with the same exchange >hash in the first place. I don't think there's a hazard there, but there is one if the client gets to co-operate with (or be) a server using a KEX method that lets the server choose the last input to the hash. Such a KEX method would be approximately as sane as rsa1024-sha1-draft-01, so I can't safely assume that no-one will ever deploy one. Indeed, I suspect that the currently-defined KEX methods might qualify depending on the host key formats in use. -- Ben Harris From ietf-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 07 16:16:48 2005 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dqcng-0007Jt-54; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 16:16:48 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dqcnd-0007JO-FE for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 16:16:45 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA21245 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 16:16:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.130]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DqdEr-00010i-Hu for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 16:44:54 -0400 X-Cam-SpamDetails: Not scanned X-Cam-AntiVirus: No virus found X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Received: from virgo.cus.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.20]:36693) by ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.130]:25) with esmtp id 1DqcnU-0007OU-2n (Exim 4.51) for ietf@ietf.org (return-path ); Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:16:36 +0100 Received: from bjh21 (helo=localhost) by virgo.cus.cam.ac.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1DqcnT-000510-Uq; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:16:35 +0100 Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 21:16:35 +0100 (BST) From: Ben Harris To: Sam Hartman In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.9 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: Resolution of last call comments for draft-harris-ssh-arcfour-fixes-02.txt X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF-Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Sam Hartman wrote: > Please add an applicability statement discussing the performance > advantages of RC4 against the known security weaknesses. You may end > up reusing text from your security considerations text. Your > applicability statement needs to suggest to the reader that they > consider the ssh newmodes draft as an alternative to your rc4 ciphers. > This alternative should be chosen in environments where the advantages > of RC4 do not make it attractive. I've done this and sent draft-harris-ssh-arcfour-fixes-03.txt to be posted. > In addition, I'm still waiting to hear back from you on the questions > raised in the security directorate review. While these points are > minor, they should be addressed. I've replied to them, removed my dodgy information theory and referenced the relevant recent papers. -- Ben Harris _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Thu Jul 07 16:16:53 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dqcnl-0007LY-0W for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 16:16:53 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA21325 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 16:16:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id EC97A3A6F4; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 20:16:43 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.130]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C96093A394 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 20:16:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Cam-SpamDetails: Not scanned X-Cam-AntiVirus: No virus found X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Received: from virgo.cus.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.20]:36694) by ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.130]:25) with esmtp id 1DqcnU-0007OX-2o (Exim 4.51) for ietf-ssh@netbsd.org (return-path ); Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:16:36 +0100 Received: from bjh21 (helo=localhost) by virgo.cus.cam.ac.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1DqcnT-000510-Uq; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:16:35 +0100 Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 21:16:35 +0100 (BST) From: Ben Harris To: Sam Hartman Cc: ietf@ietf.org, ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Subject: Re: Resolution of last call comments for draft-harris-ssh-arcfour-fixes-02.txt In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Sam Hartman wrote: > Please add an applicability statement discussing the performance > advantages of RC4 against the known security weaknesses. You may end > up reusing text from your security considerations text. Your > applicability statement needs to suggest to the reader that they > consider the ssh newmodes draft as an alternative to your rc4 ciphers. > This alternative should be chosen in environments where the advantages > of RC4 do not make it attractive. I've done this and sent draft-harris-ssh-arcfour-fixes-03.txt to be posted. > In addition, I'm still waiting to hear back from you on the questions > raised in the security directorate review. While these points are > minor, they should be addressed. I've replied to them, removed my dodgy information theory and referenced the relevant recent papers. -- Ben Harris From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Thu Jul 07 21:52:46 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dqi2l-0004aY-GG for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:52:46 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA25121 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 21:52:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 1B2003A3C4; Fri, 8 Jul 2005 01:52:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from smtpa.itss.auckland.ac.nz (mailhost.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.190.11]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B5403A3BC for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2005 01:52:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (smtpa.itss.auckland.ac.nz [127.0.0.1]) by smtpa.itss.auckland.ac.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2985634CE8; Fri, 8 Jul 2005 13:32:09 +1200 (NZST) Received: from smtpa.itss.auckland.ac.nz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtpa.itss.auckland.ac.nz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 27047-20; Fri, 8 Jul 2005 13:32:09 +1200 (NZST) Received: from iris.cs.auckland.ac.nz (iris.cs.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.33.152]) by smtpa.itss.auckland.ac.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 148F833F1C; Fri, 8 Jul 2005 13:32:08 +1200 (NZST) Received: from medusa01.cs.auckland.ac.nz (medusa01.cs.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.34.33]) by iris.cs.auckland.ac.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CF6137743; Fri, 8 Jul 2005 13:32:08 +1200 (NZST) Received: from pgut001 by medusa01.cs.auckland.ac.nz with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1Dqhit-0005Jk-00; Fri, 08 Jul 2005 13:32:11 +1200 From: pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz (Peter Gutmann) To: bjh21@bjh21.me.uk, ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Subject: Re: draft-harris-ssh-rsa-kex-02 and a possible future change In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 13:32:11 +1200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at mailhost.auckland.ac.nz Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Ben Harris writes: >I don't imagine that either of these will be controversial. They are :-). An SHA-2 discussion has just finished on the S/MIME list, where the choice was MUST SHA-256, MAY the others. The reason for this is that SHA-512, being targeted at register-rich 64-bit CPUs, is horrible to implement on the majority of current CPUs, which are neither register-rich (x86), nor 64-bit (any low-power embedded system). In fact the hardware with 95% or whatever of the market share (AMD/Intel x86) fails to meet both of these requirements. The other point is that there's no strong argument for -512 instead of -256. The only reason for having it at all is to match large ECC and DLP field sizes for DSA/ECC signatures, which is hardly a consideration in this case. Peter. From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Fri Jul 08 07:30:47 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dqr49-00011Q-2h for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Jul 2005 07:30:47 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA22478 for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2005 07:30:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 9A8903A416; Fri, 8 Jul 2005 11:30:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from chiark.greenend.org.uk (chiark.greenend.org.uk [193.201.200.170]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D697D3A3AA for ; Fri, 8 Jul 2005 11:30:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by chiark.greenend.org.uk (Debian Exim 3.35 #1) with local (return-path bjharris@chiark.greenend.org.uk) id 1Dqr3z-0000J5-00; Fri, 08 Jul 2005 12:30:35 +0100 From: Ben Harris To: pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz, ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Subject: Re: draft-harris-ssh-rsa-kex-02 and a possible future change In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Linux Unlimited Message-Id: Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 12:30:35 +0100 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list In article you write: >Ben Harris writes: > >>I don't imagine that either of these will be controversial. > >They are :-). So I see. Expect -03 on Monday. -- Ben Harris From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Sat Jul 09 08:05:36 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DrE5Q-0004CY-8y for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2005 08:05:36 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA25792 for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2005 08:05:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id D16AE3A486; Sat, 9 Jul 2005 12:05:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: IETF-SSH@netbsd.org Delivered-To: IETF-SSH@netbsd.org Received: from atlrel8.hp.com (atlrel8.hp.com [156.153.255.206]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4623E3A39F for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2005 12:05:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from taynzmail03.nz-tay.cpqcorp.net (relay.wipro.tcpn.com [16.47.4.103]) by atlrel8.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70FA41954 for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2005 08:05:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lassie.tcpip.zko.hp.com (unknown [16.116.92.100]) by taynzmail03.nz-tay.cpqcorp.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 19D251FF0 for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2005 08:05:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 07:56:10 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <05070907561045_46E06578@vms.zko.hp.com> From: Karol.Zielonko@hp.com (Karol Zielonko) To: IETF-SSH@NetBSD.org Subject: SSH Kerberos packet exchange X-VMS-To: IETF-SSH@NETBSD.ORG X-VMS-True-From: zielonko@vms.zko.hp.com (Karol Zielonko) Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list I am trying to get the Kerberos authentication code working in our VMS port of SSH. (It is based on SSH Comm. Inc's version 3.2.0). I know next to nothing about Kerberos (and only slightly more about ssh ;^). I'm looking for a draft or RFC that specifies the packet exchange over SSH that implements Kerberos authentication. Can anyone point me in the right direction? Thanks in advance, Karol Zielonko From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Sat Jul 09 14:01:10 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DrJdW-00068H-3G for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2005 14:01:10 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA15084 for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2005 14:01:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 9F9D63A4E9; Sat, 9 Jul 2005 18:01:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: IETF-SSH@NetBSD.org Delivered-To: IETF-SSH@NetBSD.org Received: from nutty.inf.ed.ac.uk (nutty.inf.ed.ac.uk [129.215.216.3]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 847993A3D5 for ; Sat, 9 Jul 2005 18:00:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hadrian.inf.ed.ac.uk (hadrian.inf.ed.ac.uk [129.215.155.148]) by nutty.inf.ed.ac.uk (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j69HNYkW030104; Sat, 9 Jul 2005 18:23:34 +0100 Received: from hadrian.inf.ed.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hadrian.inf.ed.ac.uk (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j69HNXg6030969; Sat, 9 Jul 2005 18:23:33 +0100 Received: from localhost (sxw@localhost) by hadrian.inf.ed.ac.uk (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) with ESMTP id j69HNXVB030965; Sat, 9 Jul 2005 18:23:33 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: hadrian.inf.ed.ac.uk: sxw owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 18:23:33 +0100 (BST) From: sxw@inf.ed.ac.uk To: Karol Zielonko Cc: IETF-SSH@NetBSD.org Subject: Re: SSH Kerberos packet exchange In-Reply-To: <05070907561045_46E06578@vms.zko.hp.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list On Sat, 9 Jul 2005, Karol Zielonko wrote: > I am trying to get the Kerberos authentication code working in our VMS port of > SSH. (It is based on SSH Comm. Inc's version 3.2.0). I know next to nothing > about Kerberos (and only slightly more about ssh ;^). I'm looking for a draft > or RFC that specifies the packet exchange over SSH that implements Kerberos > authentication. Can anyone point me in the right direction? http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-gsskeyex-09.txt Although, at one point, ssh.com did have their own Kerberos mechanism, named kerberos-2@ssh.com. I'm not sure whether they still use this, or now use the GSSAPI mechansism described above. kerberos-2 was never standardised, and I'm not sure if its documented anywhere. Cheers, Simon. From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Sun Jul 10 15:49:15 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Drhnd-0000kM-6R for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 10 Jul 2005 15:49:15 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21154 for ; Sun, 10 Jul 2005 15:49:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id C0A103A5F6; Sun, 10 Jul 2005 19:49:03 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: IETF-SSH@netbsd.org Delivered-To: IETF-SSH@netbsd.org Received: from atlrel8.hp.com (atlrel8.hp.com [156.153.255.206]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 055013A482 for ; Sun, 10 Jul 2005 19:49:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from taynzmail03.nz-tay.cpqcorp.net (taynzmail03.nz-tay.cpqcorp.net [16.47.4.103]) by atlrel8.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 954C5197C for ; Sun, 10 Jul 2005 15:48:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tcpi64.tcpip.zko.hp.com (unknown [16.116.92.210]) by taynzmail03.nz-tay.cpqcorp.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 5E844202D for ; Sun, 10 Jul 2005 15:48:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from unknown.hostname (16.115.197.112) by tcpi64.tcpip.zko.hp.com (V5.5-11); Sun, 10 Jul 2005 15:48:55 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <001901c58588$67ca8820$6401a8c0@americas.hpqcorp.net> From: "Karol Zielonko" To: Cc: References: Subject: Re: SSH Kerberos packet exchange Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 15:48:54 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thank you. > Although, at one point, ssh.com did have their own Kerberos mechanism, > named kerberos-2@ssh.com Unfortunately the version of SSH that I'm working on, 3.2.0, uses the kerberos-2@ssh.com variant. Anybody know if this one's packet exchange is documented anywhere? Karol From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Mon Jul 11 12:46:18 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Ds1Q6-0007zM-0a for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 12:46:18 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA27920 for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 12:46:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 2FB703A4DF; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:46:04 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: IETF-SSH@NetBSD.org Delivered-To: IETF-SSH@NetBSD.org Received: from mail-in-01.arcor-online.net (mail-in-06.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.46]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0897F3A439 for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:46:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-in-03-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-03-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.15]) by mail-in-01.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 836702A75F; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:11:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-in-07.arcor-online.net (mail-in-07.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.47]) by mail-in-03-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 778BA178C6D; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:11:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from folly.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (dsl-084-057-006-214.arcor-ip.net [84.57.6.214]) by mail-in-07.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 547542829D; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:11:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: by folly.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 31451) id A9B251427D; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:11:56 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:11:56 +0200 From: Markus Friedl To: Karol Zielonko Cc: sxw@inf.ed.ac.uk, IETF-SSH@NetBSD.org Subject: Re: SSH Kerberos packet exchange Message-ID: <20050711091156.GA11305@folly> References: <001901c58588$67ca8820$6401a8c0@americas.hpqcorp.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <001901c58588$67ca8820$6401a8c0@americas.hpqcorp.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list On Sun, Jul 10, 2005 at 03:48:54PM -0400, Karol Zielonko wrote: > Thank you. > > >Although, at one point, ssh.com did have their own Kerberos mechanism, > >named kerberos-2@ssh.com > > Unfortunately the version of SSH that I'm working on, 3.2.0, uses > the kerberos-2@ssh.com variant. Anybody know if this one's packet > exchange is documented anywhere? http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.bin/ssh/Attic/auth2-krb5.c?rev=1.2&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup contains the old openssh code for this. it got removed because it's not really secure and is now replaced by the GSSAPI variant. From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Tue Jul 12 23:27:42 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DsXuQ-0004ym-Gf for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 23:27:42 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA21414 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 23:27:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id E77353A5EB; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 03:27:30 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from host334.ipowerweb.com (host334.ipowerweb.com [72.22.69.19]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CD1973A4C6 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 03:27:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 38619 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2005 03:20:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO info3@servicepaypai.com) (80.97.190.156) by host334.ipowerweb.com with SMTP; 13 Jul 2005 03:20:36 -0000 Reply-To: "eBay" From: "eBay" To: Subject: Important Notice: Verification Required To Avoid Account Suspension Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 21:24:07 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-Id: <20050713032728.CD1973A4C6@mail.netbsd.org> Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit eBay Case ID number: PP 261-449-806 Recently, our Account Review Team identified some unusual activity in your account. In accordance with eBay's User Agreement and to ensure that your account has not been compromised, access to your account was limited. Your account access will remain limited until this issue has been resolved. Protecting the security of your eBay account is our primary concern, and we apologize for any inconvenience this may cause. In order to secure your account and quickly restore full access, we may require some specific information from you. To restore your account to its regular status, you must complete the following steps: 1. Verify your primary e-mail address by clicking the verification link 2. Confirm your identity by completing the account verification process Once you have updated your account records, your eBay session will not be interrupted and will continue as normal. To verify your eBay records ,click on the following link: http://privacy-ebay.com/.signin.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll/?SignIn&UsingSSL=1&pUserId=&ru We encourage you to log in and restore full access as soon as possible. Should access to your account remain limited for an extended period of time, it may result in further limitations on the use of your account or may result in eventual account closure. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Please understand that this is a security measure meant to help protect you and your account. We apologize for any inconvenience. Sincerely, eBay Account Review Department From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Thu Jul 14 21:54:08 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DtFOy-0008UM-1K for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 21:54:08 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA28950 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 21:54:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 177AC3A54E; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 01:53:56 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (nwkea-mail-2.sun.com [192.18.42.14]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06D8F3A415 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 01:53:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eastmail1bur.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.9.49]) by nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j6F1rqcn023721 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 18:53:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail1bur.East.Sun.COM (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id j6F1rpFx013226 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 21:53:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j6F1rpSW210128; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 21:53:51 -0400 (EDT) Subject: draft-ietf-secsh-newmodes-04.txt is ready for AD Review From: Bill Sommerfeld To: Sam Hartman , Russ Housley Cc: iesg-secretary@ietf.org, ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Message-Id: <1121392430.207125.451.camel@thunk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6.316 Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 21:53:51 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I believe that the consensus of the Secure Shell working group is that draft-ietf-secsh-newmodes-04.txt should be published as a Proposed Standard. Please start Area Director review. - Bill [This is a writeup checklist following the provisional WG Chair document shepherd process described in: draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-doc-shepherding-05.txt] 1.a) Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the Internet Draft (ID), and in particular, do they believe this ID is ready to forward to the IESG for publication? Yes. There is a known nit in the -04 version: The CAST-128 cipher takes a variable-length key of up to 128 bits; the document does not specify a key size. Given the 128-bit-and-up requirement on key length included in section 6.1 of draft-ietf-secsh-transport, the resolution is obvious and non-controversial: implementations should only use 128 bit keys with cast-128 in counter mode. This nit is expected to be fixed prior to IETF-wide last call. 1.b) Has the document had adequate review from both key WG members and key non-WG members? Do you have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed? There appears to have been adequate review. 1.c) Do you have concerns that the document needs more review from a particular (broader) perspective (e.g., security, operational complexity, someone familiar with AAA, etc.)? No. 1.d) Do you have any specific concerns/issues with this document that you believe the ADs and/or IESG should be aware of? For example, perhaps you are uncomfortable with certain parts of the document, or have concerns whether there really is a need for it. In any event, if your issues have been discussed in the WG and the WG has indicated it that it still wishes to advance the document, detail those concerns in the write-up. In the security area there have been recurring philosophical debates on the relative merits of algorithm diversity in protocols and implementations. While there appears to be general consensus that protocols should be algorithm-agile, there is also a view that excessive algorithm proliferation should be avoided. But exactly where to draw the line seems to be a matter of personal preference. The Secure Shell WG on the whole does not appear to have particularly strong opinions on the topic but has historically pursued a high-diversity approach. As a specific example, draft-ietf-secsh-transport-24.txt defined thirteen codepoints for CBC-mode algorithms. This document defines an additional thirteen codepoints for counter-mode variants of the same set of algorithms, providing more-secure alternatives to all of the ciphers exhibiting the CBC-mode problem in -transport. 1.e) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and agree with it? Discussion of this draft has been focussed and smooth. Consensus appears to be solid. 1.f) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme discontent? If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in separate email to the Responsible Area Director. No. 1.g) Have the chairs verified that the document adheres to all of the ID nits? (see http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html). The draft, submitted on April 8, 2005, still has RFC3667/8 boilerplate, which is now flagged by idnits. There is one manual checklist nit: 3.1.B: one citation appears: Bellare, Kohno, and Namprempre [ACM CCS 2002] prove that if an SSH application implements the modifications described in this document, then the symmetric cryptographic portion of that application will provably resist chosen-plaintext, chosen-ciphertext, reaction-based privacy and integrity/authenticity attacks. I've sent a suggested reword to the document editor (out of band) 1.h) Is the document split into normative and informative references? Yes. Are there normative references to IDs, where the IDs are not also ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state? No. 1.ijk) Writeup: * Technical Summary Researchers have discovered that the authenticated encryption portion of the current SSH Transport Protocol is vulnerable to several attacks. This document describes new counter-mode based symmetric encryption methods for the SSH Transport Protocol and gives specific recommendations on how frequently SSH implementations should rekey. * Working Group Summary This document was non-controversial and well-received by the WG. * Protocol Quality The spec is relatively simple, and the working group is aware of multiple implementations, has received informal reports of successful interoperability, and has not received reports of any implementation difficulties. From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Thu Jul 14 22:06:52 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DtFbI-0006zv-CH for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 22:06:52 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA29632 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 22:06:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 261DA3A537; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 02:06:45 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (nwkea-mail-2.sun.com [192.18.42.14]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2E993A415 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 02:06:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eastmail1bur.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.9.49]) by nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j6F26gcn001454 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 19:06:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail1bur.East.Sun.COM (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id j6F26gFt015238 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 22:06:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j6F26fR7210160; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 22:06:41 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Fwd: do your WG's documents use language tags?] From: Bill Sommerfeld To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Message-Id: <1121393201.207125.463.camel@thunk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6.316 Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 22:06:41 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit As my eyes glaze over when it comes to fine points of I18N, I'm forwarding this query to the WG as a whole.... - Bill -----Forwarded Message----- From: Randy Presuhn To: Working Group Chairs Subject: do your WG's documents use language tags? Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 16:42:54 -0700 Hi - Language tags are used in many applications and protocols, so we'd like to get as broad a review as practical of these: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-registry-09.txt http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-initial-02.txt The former would replace RFC 3066 (a BCP), the later would become an informational RFC. The ltru working group last call on these concludes July 28. If you or people in your WG read either of these, we'd like to hear from you. Post to ltru@ietf.org, even if all you have to say is "I've read it and don't have any specific comments on it." Randy From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Fri Jul 15 00:00:10 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DtHMw-00047N-NY for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 00:00:10 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA05589 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 00:00:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 8BB053A3E7; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 04:00:03 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (nwkea-mail-2.sun.com [192.18.42.14]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FA073A550 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 03:59:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eastmail1bur.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.9.49]) by nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j6F3xwcn009216 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:59:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail1bur.East.Sun.COM (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id j6F3xwFt001731 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 23:59:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j6F3xwea210682; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 23:59:58 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-secsh-break-03.txt From: Bill Sommerfeld To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org In-Reply-To: <1117057237.32717.415.camel@unknown.hamachi.org> References: <1117057237.32717.415.camel@unknown.hamachi.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Message-Id: <1121399997.207125.512.camel@thunk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6.316 Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 23:59:58 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The working group last call on draft-ietf-secsh-break-03.txt has concluded. We have clear WG consensus to advance this as a standards-track document. Note: A small number of typographical errors were found during the last call period. A new revision of the draft with these typos fixed should be released before the document is sent for IETF-wide last call. - Bill From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Fri Jul 15 01:01:03 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DtIJq-0005Km-Td for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 01:01:03 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA09374 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 01:01:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id B9E8F3AA1D; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 05:00:52 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (nwkea-mail-1.sun.com [192.18.42.13]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 565DD3A9E6 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 05:00:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eastmail1bur.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.9.49]) by nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j6F4Rd3t027996 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 21:27:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail1bur.East.Sun.COM (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id j6F4RcFx007449 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 00:27:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j6F4Rb5w210756; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 00:27:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: draft-ietf-secsh-break-03 ready for AD review. From: Bill Sommerfeld To: Sam Hartman , Russ Housley Cc: iesg-secretary@ietf.org, ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Message-Id: <1121401657.207125.518.camel@thunk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6.316 Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 00:27:37 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Having passed a WG Last Call, draft-ietf-secsh-break-03 is ready for AD review. The WG last call turned up only typographical errors in the -03 revision; fixes to these typos should appear in a forthcoming -04 version. 1.a) Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the Internet Draft (ID), and in particular, do they believe this ID is ready to forward to the IESG for publication? Yes. 1.b) Has the document had adequate review from both key WG members and key non-WG members? Do you have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed? Adequate review has occurred from WG members, and it has been reviewed by people with subject-matter expertise in terminal/console servers and similar devices. 1.c) Do you have concerns that the document needs more review from a particular (broader) perspective (e.g., security, operational complexity, someone familiar with AAA, etc.)? No. 1.d) Do you have any specific concerns/issues with this document that you believe the ADs and/or IESG should be aware of? For example, perhaps you are uncomfortable with certain parts of the document, or have concerns whether there really is a need for it. In any event, if your issues have been discussed in the WG and the WG has indicated it that it still wishes to advance the document, detail those concerns in the write-up. No. 1.e) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and agree with it? There is strong consensus to publish this document. 1.f) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme discontent? If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in separate email to the Responsible Area Director. No. 1.g) Have the chairs verified that the document adheres to all of the ID nits? (see http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html). Yes. 1.h) Is the document split into normative and informative references? Are there normative references to IDs, where the IDs are not also ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state? (note here that the RFC editor will not publish an RFC with normative references to IDs, it will delay publication until all such IDs are also ready for publication as RFCs.) Yes. 1.ijk) Write-up section: * Technical Summary The Session Channel Break Extension provides a means to send a BREAK signal over a Secure Shell (SSH) terminal session. * Working Group Summary The consensus of the working group was to publish this as a standards-track document. * Protocol Quality This extension is a replacement for vendor-specific hacks which provide the same functionality. There are known to be multiple interoperable implementations of this extension and substantial vendor interest. From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Fri Jul 15 15:50:17 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DtWCO-0005vp-VT for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:50:17 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA11007 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:50:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id D98723A909; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:50:05 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from newodin.ietf.org (unknown [132.151.6.50]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 768CB3A5DD for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:50:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mlee by newodin.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1DtWCA-0001tG-5z; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:50:02 -0400 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-secsh-x509-02.txt Message-Id: Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:50:02 -0400 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Secure Shell Working Group of the IETF. Title : X.509 authentication in SSH2 Author(s) : O. Saarenmaa, J. Galbraith Filename : draft-ietf-secsh-x509-02.txt Pages : 8 Date : 2005-7-15 The X.509 extension specifies how X.509 keys and signatures are used within the SSH2 protocol. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-x509-02.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-secsh-x509-02.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-x509-02.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2005-7-15131039.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-x509-02.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-secsh-x509-02.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2005-7-15131039.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Fri Jul 15 18:06:11 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DtYJv-00019V-1n for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:06:11 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA28950 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:06:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 108B73A55C; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 22:06:03 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (nwkea-mail-2.sun.com [192.18.42.14]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47DB73A3DD for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 22:06:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eastmail1bur.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.9.49]) by nwkea-mail-2.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j6FM60cn024284 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:06:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail1bur.East.Sun.COM (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id j6FM5xFv022132 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:06:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j6FM5wHD214026; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:05:59 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WG Chair Nits on draft-ietf-secsh-gsskeyex-09.txt From: Bill Sommerfeld To: Jeffrey Hutzelman Cc: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Message-Id: <1121465158.212935.447.camel@thunk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6.316 Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:05:58 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Going through the manual part of http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html I found a few nits: Abstract: There are multiple references in the abstract. These need to be removed so the abstract can be stand-alone. Also, the reference-to-2119 text should not appear in the Abstract. (Usually it goes in immediately after the Introduction) Security Considerations section: "SSH_MSG_KEXGEE_CONTINUE" looks like a typo. You don't need to rev the draft right now as I'm about to start a Last Call. - Bill From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Fri Jul 15 18:14:41 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DtYS9-00031O-Px for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:14:41 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA29936 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:14:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id BFDA13A5F8; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 22:14:37 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (nwkea-mail-1.sun.com [192.18.42.13]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 090393A5EF for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 22:14:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eastmail1bur.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.9.49]) by nwkea-mail-1.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j6FMEZ3t008511 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:14:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail1bur.East.Sun.COM (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id j6FMEZFt023601 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:14:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j6FMEYTO214074; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:14:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Start of WG Last Call on draft-ietf-secsh-gsskeyex-09.txt From: Bill Sommerfeld To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Message-Id: <1121465673.212935.485.camel@thunk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6.316 Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:14:34 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This message marks the start of a Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-secsh-gsskeyex-09.txt, for publication as an Proposed Standard. This last call period expires on August 5th, 2005 (extended to the end of the IETF meeting week). During this Last Call period, comments supporting publication are encouraged as are comments pointing out problems or suggesting changes to the spec. Reports of successful implementation of this draft are encouraged. As a reminder, tests of interoperability are *not* a prerequisite for publication as Proposed Standard but any obstacles to implementation or spec ambiguities should be corrected before publication. Please send comments to the WG list as a whole. Reports of minor problems (typos) will not delay advancement of this document. - Bill From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Fri Jul 15 19:06:11 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DtZFz-0003Bz-J3 for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:06:11 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA05614 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:06:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id E68BE3A3D0; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 23:06:04 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com (brmea-mail-4.Sun.COM [192.18.98.36]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D4203A3A2 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 23:06:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eastmail2bur.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.13.40]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j6FN62r3016341 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 17:06:02 -0600 (MDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail2bur.East.Sun.COM (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id j6FN61C2003438 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:06:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j6FN61jp214195; Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:06:01 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: 'DSSH' From: Bill Sommerfeld To: Tom Petch Cc: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org In-Reply-To: <00f601c57edd$df4d8980$0601a8c0@pc6> References: <00f601c57edd$df4d8980$0601a8c0@pc6> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Message-Id: <1121468759.212935.595.camel@thunk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6.316 Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:06:01 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sat, 2005-07-02 at 04:12, Tom Petch wrote: > Has anyone ever looked at the possibility of a DSSH comparable to a DTLS, ie > adding a shim layer to enable SSH to work over an unreliable transport, such as > UDP? I'm not personally aware of any such thing. There has been a small amount of discussion of something of an inverse of this, which is forwarding of UDP traffic via SSH, but this is one of those "ideas in search of a document author" which has never turned into an actual draft. - Bill From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Sat Jul 16 13:23:13 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DtqNc-00060e-TO for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:23:13 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA15488 for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:23:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id B1E373A464; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 16:27:07 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.130]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E126B3A3A1 for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 16:27:05 +0000 (UTC) X-Cam-SpamDetails: Not scanned X-Cam-AntiVirus: No virus found X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Received: from libra.cus.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.19]:41177) by ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.130]:25) with esmtp id 1DtpV4-0000kf-09 (Exim 4.51) for ietf-ssh@netbsd.org (return-path ); Sat, 16 Jul 2005 17:26:50 +0100 Received: from bjh21 (helo=localhost) by libra.cus.cam.ac.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1DtpV3-0006MY-N1 for ietf-ssh@netbsd.org; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 17:26:49 +0100 Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 17:26:49 +0100 (BST) From: Ben Harris To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Subject: draft-harris-ssh-rsa-kex-03 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list Yet another RSA KEX draft has made it into the repository. I hope this represents the final version of the protocol (apart from moving its name into the IETF namespace if it becomes an RFC), though probably not of the document. This version: 1: goes back to using SHA-256 with 2048-bit RSA keys, since SHA-512 is ludicrously slow. 2: has the server send its host key to the client in SSH_MSG_KEXRSA_PUBKEY rather than in SSH_MSG_KEXRSA_DONE. This prevents the server manipulating the exchange hash input by changing its public key. I hope you like it. -- Ben Harris From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Sat Jul 16 15:20:43 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DtsDJ-0006uH-K1 for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 15:20:43 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA26525 for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 15:20:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 347A53A49A; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 19:20:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Received: from nutcracker.it.su.se (unknown [213.80.60.227]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C26163A47F for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 19:20:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by nutcracker.it.su.se (Postfix, from userid 913) id 184B834C17B; Sat, 16 Jul 2005 18:34:06 +0200 (CEST) To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-secsh-x509-02.txt References: From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Love_H=F6rnquist_=C5strand?= Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2005 18:34:00 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Internet-Drafts@ietf.org's message of "Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:50:02 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list --=-=-= Internet-Drafts@ietf.org writes: > The X.509 extension specifies how X.509 keys and signatures are used > within the SSH2 protocol. *** EKU RFC3280 claims serverAuth and clientAuth EKU is for -- TLS WWW server authentication and -- TLS WWW client authentication Sure you want to overload that meaning TLS and SSH server/client authentication ? Should my http possibly run with the same certificate as my ssh server? So if my http server is compromised, it will expose my users to that stolen certificate when they try to contant that server. I think you should make up your own object identifiers. *** PKCS.7 [PKCS.7.1993] is kind of oldish, RFC3852 defines CMS now. *** Certificates in "4. Use in SSH2 Protocol" there is certificate data defined: string DER encoded x.509v3 certificate data How may certificates is this, one, or a chain ? If the pki is deeper then grass, one level, (a real tree), it might good to send the whole chain (excluding the trust anchor) *** x509v3-sign "4.3 x509v3-sign" talkes about "DER encoded PKCS7 data", I assume that is DER encocded SignedData from CMS. I think that should be more explicit. I read over the document again when get back from the movie. Love --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (NetBSD) iQEVAwUAQtk2/do1gLFKFEjAAQLoCgf/TIsta4wjjwpBzvZJjMyZentZIa/RnZDe j5Qr4L8gmcXgnXbqZxj2SzQ2SR4htxm2O/10Fx23G+T0I7YgNK6h5UDzz+lOhikp XALMroptVOo++n4rKygNdsOKGUJiidn9QsarGLZqnVbK6CD0tS6YTg4m1ybHWEI0 iKlzQ0MUjRC87p9mL3dz/XnuZA0Snr6LSQcxDi1x1yTBOHI8ngOJRZK/eHAcYjBx u5/lDyyojm4z4ryMOePbyQnL8DwUKC6E8K3k87e2v/ZDVFJsDtNz/ac7NqtzBOCr BrGvZPP+kkcha01WU83k1JN7dQgAdTHHIZGAMV4aUgdJOXSTpBOLXw== =+EBA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Tue Jul 19 16:28:00 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Duyh5-0006jF-To for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 16:28:00 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA12895 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 16:27:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id CC08C3A3A8; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 20:27:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from chiark.greenend.org.uk (chiark.greenend.org.uk [193.201.200.170]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F32B33A39C for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 20:27:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by chiark.greenend.org.uk (Debian Exim 3.35 #1) with local (return-path bjharris@chiark.greenend.org.uk) id 1Duygt-00029P-00 for ietf-ssh@netbsd.org; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 21:27:47 +0100 From: Ben Harris To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Subject: Re: draft-harris-ssh-rsa-kex-03 In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Linux Unlimited Message-Id: Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 21:27:47 +0100 Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list In article you write: >Yet another RSA KEX draft has made it into the repository. I hope this >represents the final version of the protocol Of course, saying that was a good way to expose silly mistakes like, for instance, having SSH_MSG_RSAKEX_PUBKEY containing K_T||K_S and the exchange hash including K_S||K_T. This isn't a security hole, but it's going to confuse implementors, so there'll be a -04 in August that changes the order of SSH_MSG_RSAKEX_PUBKEY. Sorry about that. -- Ben Harris (apart from moving its name >into the IETF namespace if it becomes an RFC), though probably not of the >document. This version: > >1: goes back to using SHA-256 with 2048-bit RSA keys, since SHA-512 is > ludicrously slow. > >2: has the server send its host key to the client in SSH_MSG_KEXRSA_PUBKEY > rather than in SSH_MSG_KEXRSA_DONE. This prevents the server > manipulating the exchange hash input by changing its public key. > >I hope you like it. > > > >-- >Ben Harris From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-archive=odin.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Fri Jul 22 06:09:11 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DvuSr-0002xd-Fg for secsh-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 06:09:11 -0400 Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA27806 for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 06:09:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 0) id 10C863A44D; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:09:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Received: from nutty.inf.ed.ac.uk (nutty.inf.ed.ac.uk [129.215.216.3]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1DB53A3F2 for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:08:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boogaloo.inf.ed.ac.uk (boogaloo.inf.ed.ac.uk [129.215.165.25]) by nutty.inf.ed.ac.uk (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j6MA8rkW021438; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:08:53 +0100 Received: from boogaloo.inf.ed.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by boogaloo.inf.ed.ac.uk (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j6MA8r5q030393; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:08:53 +0100 Received: from localhost (sxw@localhost) by boogaloo.inf.ed.ac.uk (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) with ESMTP id j6MA8qZF030387; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:08:52 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: boogaloo.inf.ed.ac.uk: sxw owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:08:52 +0100 (BST) From: sxw@inf.ed.ac.uk To: Bill Sommerfeld Cc: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Subject: Re: Start of WG Last Call on draft-ietf-secsh-gsskeyex-09.txt In-Reply-To: <1121465673.212935.485.camel@thunk> Message-ID: References: <1121465673.212935.485.camel@thunk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org Precedence: list On Fri, 15 Jul 2005, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: > During this Last Call period, comments supporting publication are > encouraged as are comments pointing out problems or suggesting changes > to the spec. I have implemented this draft in many of its incarnations, including the most recent. I support its publication. Cheers, Simon.