From websupportonline@mail2webmaster.com Sat Nov 6 15:44:59 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FD543A6821 for ; Sat, 6 Nov 2010 15:44:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 4.731 X-Spam-Level: **** X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.731 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152, SUBJ_ALL_CAPS=2.077] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ffquYhUGq6zf for ; Sat, 6 Nov 2010 15:44:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server268.com (server268.com [64.14.79.60]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 292E73A6817 for ; Sat, 6 Nov 2010 15:44:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 17634 invoked by uid 2007); 6 Nov 2010 22:45:10 -0000 Message-ID: <20101106224510.17633.qmail@server268.com> Reply-To: "=?utf-8?Q?Web=20Support=20Team?=" From: "=?utf-8?Q?Web=20Support=20Team?=" To: info@update.org Subject: =?utf-8?B?Q09ORklSTSBZT1VSIEVNQUlMIElERU5USVRZIEJFTE9X?= Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2010 15:45:10 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: WebMail 2.55.13.14 X-Originating-IP: 41.190.2.165 X-Originating-Email: info@aafevv.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_b9f9ddd9cdbbde3e393ba36af841929c2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit --_b9f9ddd9cdbbde3e393ba36af841929c2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Attn: Account owner This message is from web mail admin messaging center to all web mail account owners. We are currently upgrading our data base and e-mail account center. We are canceling unused web mail email account to create more space for new accounts. To prevent your account from closing you will have to update it below to know it's status as a currently used account. CONFIRM YOUR EMAIL IDENTITY BELOW Account Details *********************************************** Email User-name :........ ..... EMAIL Password :............... Date of Birth :............... Country or Territory :........ ************************************************ Warning!!! Any account owner that refuses to update his/her account within Three days of this update notification will loose his/her account permanently. You have limited time to supply the above details for effective services by replying to this email and any delay or incorrect username or password, may cause our server to automatically log you out from our system. Thank you. Regards, Web Support Team. Thank you for usage --_b9f9ddd9cdbbde3e393ba36af841929c2 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit



Attn: Account owner
This message is from web mail admin messaging center to all web mail account
owners. We are currently upgrading our data base and e-mail account center.
We are canceling unused web mail email account to create more space for new accounts.
To prevent your account from closing you will have to update
it below to know it's status as a currently used account.

CONFIRM YOUR EMAIL IDENTITY BELOW Account Details


***********************************************
Email User-name :........ .....
EMAIL Password :...............
Date of Birth :...............
Country or Territory :........
************************************************
Warning!!! Any account owner that refuses to update his/her

account within Three days of this update notification will loose his/her account permanently.
You have limited time to supply the above details for effective services
by
replying to this email and any delay or incorrect username or password,
may
cause our server to automatically log you out from our system.
Thank you.
Regards,

Web Support Team.

Thank you for usage
--_b9f9ddd9cdbbde3e393ba36af841929c2-- From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Wed Nov 17 12:05:28 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 328643A6982 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:05:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lCjh1VHarYtt for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:05:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:7:216:3eff:fe67:11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DE1C3A6998 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:05:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 605) id C1B1D19D5D6; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:06:07 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "sj-iport-6.cisco.com", Issuer "Cisco SSCA" (not verified)) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0EF919D543 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:06:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApMFAFa040yrR7Ht/2dsb2JhbACUTY4AcaYKmzWFSwSEWoV+gww X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,212,1288569600"; d="scan'208";a="621667110" Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com ([171.71.177.237]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 Nov 2010 18:54:45 +0000 Received: from [10.33.251.139] ([10.33.251.139]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oAHIsjAm002925; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 18:54:45 GMT From: Joe Salowey Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: SSH URI draft Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 10:54:54 -0800 Message-Id: Cc: Alexey Melnikov To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org Precedence: list I submitted a new version of the SSH URI draft from several years back. = I removed the SFTP and SCP schemes since I could nto find a stable = reference. We can address these protocols in a separate document. = Please review and send comments. I'm particularly interested to know = what URI schemes have been implemented for these protocols. =20 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-salowey-secsh-uri-00 Thanks, Joe= From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Wed Nov 17 12:17:35 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFAB33A6965 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:17:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.523 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.523 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MIVeuVGDPWeI for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:17:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:7:216:3eff:fe67:11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D83E43A695F for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:17:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 605) id 350C719D5D1; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:18:18 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from rcsinet14.oracle.com (rcsinet14.oracle.com [148.87.113.126]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "rcsinet14.oracle.com", Issuer "VeriSign Trust Network" (not verified)) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6853E19D5AE for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:18:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com (rcsinet10.oracle.com [148.87.113.121]) by rcsinet14.oracle.com (Sentrion-MP-4.0.0/Sentrion-MP-4.0.0) with ESMTP id oAHKIDep028014 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:18:13 GMT Received: from rcsinet13.oracle.com (rcsinet13.oracle.com [148.87.113.125]) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id oAHKI8IF026213 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:18:09 GMT Received: from acsmt355.oracle.com (acsmt355.oracle.com [141.146.40.155]) by rcsinet13.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id oAH739n9029833; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:18:08 GMT Received: from abhmt010.oracle.com by acsmt353.oracle.com with ESMTP id 787842481290025087; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:18:07 -0800 Received: from oracle.com (/129.153.128.104) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:18:07 -0800 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:18:00 -0600 From: Nicolas Williams To: Joe Salowey Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, Alexey Melnikov Subject: Re: SSH URI draft Message-ID: <20101117201800.GT20162@oracle.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2010-03-02) Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org Precedence: list On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:54:54AM -0800, Joe Salowey wrote: > I submitted a new version of the SSH URI draft from several years > back. I removed the SFTP and SCP schemes since I could nto find a > stable reference. We can address these protocols in a separate > document. Please review and send comments. I'm particularly > interested to know what URI schemes have been implemented for these > protocols. > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-salowey-secsh-uri-00 Nothing about what resources can be referred via SSH URIs other than the entire SSHv2 service? Resources I can think of: - shell sessions, with and without pty - port forwardings - subsystems - paths to resources for those subsystems Now, to be fair, the idea of specifying port forwardings (and agent, X11 display, and other forwardings) in URIs scares me, so I'd rather leave them out than in. And clearly SFTP merits its own URI scheme, and perhaps so do all subsystems. But ISTM that we should at least consider distinguishing between "the whole service" and "shell session". Nico -- From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Wed Nov 17 13:32:59 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C60173A6403 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 13:32:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -110.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M2qHJbhvJMzk for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 13:32:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:7:216:3eff:fe67:11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E46053A63CA for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 13:32:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 605) id 622D419D5CF; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:33:41 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com (sj-iport-4.cisco.com [171.68.10.86]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "sj-iport-4.cisco.com", Issuer "Cisco SSCA" (not verified)) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9162D19D5A5 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:33:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: sj-iport-4.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEABbZ40yrR7H+/2dsb2JhbACiU3GlDZs/hUsEhFqFfoMM X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,213,1288569600"; d="scan'208";a="219228763" Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com ([171.71.177.254]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 Nov 2010 21:33:36 +0000 Received: from [10.33.251.139] ([10.33.251.139]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id oAHLXZSA004119; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:33:35 GMT Subject: Re: SSH URI draft Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Joe Salowey In-Reply-To: <20101117201800.GT20162@oracle.com> Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 13:33:41 -0800 Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, Alexey Melnikov Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <240A39F3-7C7B-43E4-B340-D5A9D94ABFD5@cisco.com> References: <20101117201800.GT20162@oracle.com> To: Nicolas Williams X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org Precedence: list The original intention was for interactive SSH shell sessions. I agree = that port forwarding should be out of scope for this. I also tend to = think that other subsystems would be out of scope as well. I hadn't = really thought about shell sessions without pty, did you have something = in mind? =20 The draft needs to be clear about this so I'll work up some text. Do = you see a problem with using "ssh" as the scheme name to mean SSH shell = sessions with pty? On Nov 17, 2010, at 12:18 PM, Nicolas Williams wrote: > On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:54:54AM -0800, Joe Salowey wrote: >> I submitted a new version of the SSH URI draft from several years >> back. I removed the SFTP and SCP schemes since I could nto find a >> stable reference. We can address these protocols in a separate >> document. Please review and send comments. I'm particularly >> interested to know what URI schemes have been implemented for these >> protocols. =20 >>=20 >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-salowey-secsh-uri-00 >=20 > Nothing about what resources can be referred via SSH URIs other than = the > entire SSHv2 service? >=20 > Resources I can think of: >=20 > - shell sessions, with and without pty > - port forwardings > - subsystems > - paths to resources for those subsystems >=20 > Now, to be fair, the idea of specifying port forwardings (and agent, = X11 > display, and other forwardings) in URIs scares me, so I'd rather leave > them out than in. And clearly SFTP merits its own URI scheme, and > perhaps so do all subsystems. But ISTM that we should at least = consider > distinguishing between "the whole service" and "shell session". >=20 > Nico > --=20 From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Wed Nov 17 13:45:39 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 304CE3A6781 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 13:45:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.525 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.525 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.073, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ywgGXk2N0FJr for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 13:45:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:7:216:3eff:fe67:11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C0DD3A6403 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 13:45:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 605) id 1D09919D5C6; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:46:22 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com (rcsinet10.oracle.com [148.87.113.121]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "rcsinet10.oracle.com", Issuer "VeriSign Trust Network" (not verified)) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C06C619D49D for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:46:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com (acsinet15.oracle.com [141.146.126.227]) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id oAHLkEMv029294 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:46:15 GMT Received: from acsmt355.oracle.com (acsmt355.oracle.com [141.146.40.155]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id oAHBWRl3016269; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:46:12 GMT Received: from abhmt013.oracle.com by acsmt354.oracle.com with ESMTP id 788124861290030327; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 13:45:27 -0800 Received: from oracle.com (/129.153.128.104) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 13:45:26 -0800 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 15:45:22 -0600 From: Nicolas Williams To: Joe Salowey Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, Alexey Melnikov Subject: Re: SSH URI draft Message-ID: <20101117214522.GW20162@oracle.com> References: <20101117201800.GT20162@oracle.com> <240A39F3-7C7B-43E4-B340-D5A9D94ABFD5@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <240A39F3-7C7B-43E4-B340-D5A9D94ABFD5@cisco.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2010-03-02) Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org Precedence: list On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 01:33:41PM -0800, Joe Salowey wrote: > The original intention was for interactive SSH shell sessions. I > agree that port forwarding should be out of scope for this. I also > tend to think that other subsystems would be out of scope as well. I > hadn't really thought about shell sessions without pty, did you have > something in mind? No-pty is only really useful if you're sending a command-line, or if you're a masochist. So perhaps an encoded command-line would be a resource to name... But I'd have the same concerns as with forwardings: getting someone to click on a dangerous URI is too easy. So... never mind, I think. > The draft needs to be clear about this so I'll work up some text. Do > you see a problem with using "ssh" as the scheme name to mean SSH > shell sessions with pty? None at all. Nico -- From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Wed Nov 17 14:12:02 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 525C43A69A2 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:12:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.671 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.671 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.316, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XlTV0qvlhxYd for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:12:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:7:216:3eff:fe67:11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A51D3A6800 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:12:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 605) id C384419D5E8; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:12:44 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Received: from Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG (Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG [216.46.5.7]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62F4819D5D2 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:12:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (from mouse@localhost) by Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA08308; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:12:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:12:41 -0500 (EST) From: der Mouse Message-Id: <201011172212.RAA08308@Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG> 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 botnet zombies. X-Composition-Start-Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:10:49 -0500 (EST) To: ietf-ssh@NetBSD.org Subject: Re: SSH URI draft In-Reply-To: <20101117214522.GW20162@oracle.com> References: <20101117201800.GT20162@oracle.com> <240A39F3-7C7B-43E4-B340-D5A9D94ABFD5@cisco.com> <20101117214522.GW20162@oracle.com> Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org Precedence: list > No-pty is only really useful if you're sending a command-line, or if > you're a masochist. Not quite. On a few occasions I've seen failure modes that broke pty logins but let me do no-pty stuff. (I do, however, think that that case is rather out of scope for URI design.) /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML mouse@rodents-montreal.org / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Wed Nov 17 14:52:46 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46DF23A680F for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:52:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.526 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.526 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.072, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NfPb+mWcdtD8 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:52:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:7:216:3eff:fe67:11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6214C3A6807 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:52:45 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 605) id 7874919D5FD; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:53:28 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com (rcsinet10.oracle.com [148.87.113.121]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "rcsinet10.oracle.com", Issuer "VeriSign Trust Network" (not verified)) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0892419D5E6 for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:53:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rcsinet13.oracle.com (rcsinet13.oracle.com [148.87.113.125]) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id oAHMrNbW014949 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:53:25 GMT Received: from acsmt353.oracle.com (acsmt353.oracle.com [141.146.40.153]) by rcsinet13.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id oAHAcQne006710; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:53:23 GMT Received: from abhmt001.oracle.com by acsmt353.oracle.com with ESMTP id 788324551290034402; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:53:22 -0800 Received: from oracle.com (/129.153.128.104) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:53:22 -0800 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 16:53:18 -0600 From: Nicolas Williams To: der Mouse Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Re: SSH URI draft Message-ID: <20101117225317.GY20162@oracle.com> References: <20101117201800.GT20162@oracle.com> <240A39F3-7C7B-43E4-B340-D5A9D94ABFD5@cisco.com> <20101117214522.GW20162@oracle.com> <201011172212.RAA08308@Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201011172212.RAA08308@Sparkle.Rodents-Montreal.ORG> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2010-03-02) Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org Precedence: list On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 05:12:41PM -0500, der Mouse wrote: > > No-pty is only really useful if you're sending a command-line, or if > > you're a masochist. > > Not quite. On a few occasions I've seen failure modes that broke pty > logins but let me do no-pty stuff. (I do, however, think that that > case is rather out of scope for URI design.) Yes, but I consider power users equivalent to masochists in this context :) From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Fri Nov 19 04:40:02 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A55028C0F0 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 04:40:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.949 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vPif1dKL1sDO for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 04:40:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:7:216:3eff:fe67:11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0313128C0D9 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 04:40:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 605) id 68FA219D652; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 12:40:42 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (mail.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87C0E19D5D4 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 12:40:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id E81C140006; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 12:34:48 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix, from userid 1674) id DCBA540002; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 12:34:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from stalhein.lysator.liu.se (stalhein.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.204]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AE5E40006; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 12:34:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from stalhein.lysator.liu.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by stalhein.lysator.liu.se (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oAJBYlGl003249; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 12:34:47 +0100 (MET) Received: (from nisse@localhost) by stalhein.lysator.liu.se (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4/Submit) id oAJBYkMO003248; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 12:34:46 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: stalhein.lysator.liu.se: nisse set sender to nisse@lysator.liu.se using -f From: nisse@lysator.liu.se (Niels =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=) To: Joe Salowey Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, Alexey Melnikov Subject: Re: SSH URI draft References: Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 12:34:46 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Joe Salowey's message of "Wed, 17 Nov 2010 10:54:54 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (usg-unix-v) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org Precedence: list Joe Salowey writes: > I'm particularly interested to know what URI schemes have been > implemented for these protocols. The Mercurial version control uses uri's like ssh://shell.gmplib.org//home/hgfiles/gmp where the extra slash before /home means that it's an absolute filename. An uri's without it, e.g., ssh://shell.gmplib.org/hack/private-gmp-hack refers to a repository under my home directory (i,e., $HOME/hack/private-gmp-hack). I imagine other modern version control systems do something similar. The meaning is loosely: Identify a particularly directory, which is accessible by means of an ssh connection. In most or all cases, the access would use a session channel and an "exec" request. This is the most widespread use of ssh uri's in practice which I am aware of (and appearantly quite different from what's described in the SSH URI draft). Regards, /Niels -- Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26. Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance. From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Fri Nov 19 07:54:30 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA0573A6862 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 07:54:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.536 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.536 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_EQ_STATIC=1.172, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i18mFOAvQNZ6 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 07:54:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:7:216:3eff:fe67:11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC17B3A6867 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 07:54:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 605) id 5AED119D578; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 15:55:10 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from chcg0.coredos.com (ip47.67-202-126.vswitch.static.steadfast.net [67.202.126.47]) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A95F919D56E for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 15:55:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by chcg0.coredos.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8650C52A0E17; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 08:39:51 -0600 (CST) Received: from chcg0.coredos.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (chcg0.umeadesign.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Syb73VzuH5aP; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 08:39:50 -0600 (CST) Received: from titania.braingia.org (66-190-11-170.dhcp.stpt.wi.charter.com [66.190.11.170]) by chcg0.coredos.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52E4852A0008; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 08:39:50 -0600 (CST) Received: by titania.braingia.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EACF9A2088; Fri, 19 Nov 2010 08:39:49 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 08:39:49 -0600 From: suehring@braingia.org To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Cc: Joe Salowey Subject: Re: SSH URI draft Message-ID: <20101119143949.GA10357@braingia.org> Mail-Followup-To: suehring@braingia.org, ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, Joe Salowey References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org Precedence: list On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 12:34:46PM +0100, Niels Möller wrote: > The Mercurial version control uses uri's like > > ssh://shell.gmplib.org//home/hgfiles/gmp > So there's a path after the host part and that path represents a command or file or path to repository, etc? You're correct in that a non-empty path element is not ignored in this draft. A parameter should be used for this instead otherwise it seems rather unclear what's supposed to happen with that path element outside of the context of the application-specific usage. As a side note, why wouldn't the scheme use a . to indicate a relative reference (as recommended RFC 3986)? Steve From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Sun Nov 21 14:59:21 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBF5C3A6918 for ; Sun, 21 Nov 2010 14:59:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.601 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, MANGLED_BACK=2.3, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ubg-jO0VZ-sb for ; Sun, 21 Nov 2010 14:59:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:7:216:3eff:fe67:11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1AF33A6810 for ; Sun, 21 Nov 2010 14:59:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 605) id 8F84819DC08; Sun, 21 Nov 2010 23:00:12 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from zucker.schokokeks.org (zucker.schokokeks.org [78.46.69.5]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F1C719DBC5 for ; Sun, 21 Nov 2010 23:00:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from laverne.localnet (brln-4d0c3854.pool.mediaWays.net [::ffff:77.12.56.84]) (AUTH: PLAIN hanno-default@schokokeks.org, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by zucker.schokokeks.org with esmtp; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 00:00:03 +0100 id 000000000001C019.000000004CE9A474.00005D24 From: Hanno =?utf-8?q?B=C3=B6ck?= To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: RSA PSS in SSH? Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 00:00:01 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.36; KDE/4.5.3; x86_64; ; ) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1694304.tVeHrRK1qH"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201011220000.02230.hanno@hboeck.de> Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org Precedence: list --nextPart1694304.tVeHrRK1qH Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, According to RFC 4253, secure shell uses the old RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 padding= =20 scheme for RSA signatures. Are there any plans for a transition to RSASSA-PSS (as specified in pkcs #1= =20 2.1)? (I saw that RFC 4253 already specifies the use of RSA-OAEP for encrypted ke= y=20 exchange) =2D-=20 Hanno B=C3=B6ck Blog: http://www.hboeck.de/ GPG: 3DBD3B20 Jabber/Mail: hanno@hboeck.de http://schokokeks.org - professional webhosting --nextPart1694304.tVeHrRK1qH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkzppHIACgkQr2QksT29OyAhBgCdGE+mFKY8aw4+KAQgrL7gE9jw O0cAn0XPpehorBt5iJOcIrGLeHI7T8Vg =ESGi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1694304.tVeHrRK1qH-- From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Mon Nov 22 03:34:54 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AE143A6A8A for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 03:34:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.949 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1WAMCHNl43Am for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 03:34:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:7:216:3eff:fe67:11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 671723A68C1 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 03:34:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 605) id D423419DAA6; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 11:35:38 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (mail.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D833F19DA24 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 11:35:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D4C84000E; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:35:29 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix, from userid 1674) id 91CC34001F; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:35:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from stalhein.lysator.liu.se (stalhein.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.204]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A7884000E; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:35:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from stalhein.lysator.liu.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by stalhein.lysator.liu.se (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oAMBZSqZ025071; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:35:28 +0100 (MET) Received: (from nisse@localhost) by stalhein.lysator.liu.se (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4/Submit) id oAMBZRtQ025070; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:35:27 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: stalhein.lysator.liu.se: nisse set sender to nisse@lysator.liu.se using -f From: nisse@lysator.liu.se (Niels =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=) To: suehring@braingia.org Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org, Joe Salowey Subject: Re: SSH URI draft References: <20101119143949.GA10357@braingia.org> Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:35:27 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20101119143949.GA10357@braingia.org> (suehring@braingia.org's message of "Fri, 19 Nov 2010 08:39:49 -0600") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (usg-unix-v) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org Precedence: list suehring@braingia.org writes: > So there's a path after the host part and that path represents a command > or file or path to repository, etc? It's a path to the repository, which is implemented a directory in the file system. It is passed as a command line argument to the process started on the remote machine (and the actual command to use, hg --server or whatever, is implicit, and I agree it's a good decision not to encode it into the uri. Would make some sense as an optional parameter, though). > A parameter should be used for this instead otherwise it seems rather > unclear what's supposed to happen with that path element outside of > the context of the application-specific usage. Is there any other reasonable interpretation of a path-element than as a name in the filesystem hierarchy on the ssh server? That said, this syntax was of course designed for use in a specific application. And I don't know if you want the standard ssh uri's being designed to cover the use case of identifying to a particular directory on a particular server. > As a side note, why wouldn't the scheme use a . to indicate a relative > reference (as recommended RFC 3986)? What would that look like? ssh://shell.gmplib.org/./hack/private-gmp-hack for a path relative to my home directory, and ssh://shell.gmplib.org/home/hgfiles/gmp for an absolute file name? Are there any example where this syntax is used? To me, it seems counter intuitive, but that is mostly because I'm used to "/./" being equivalent to just "/"; I'm not familiar with RFC3986 conventions for anchoring the path. (And I'm just a mercurial user. I find its use of ssh uri's reasonable, but I wasn't involved in any way when the used syntax was discussed or decided). Regards, /Niels -- Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26. Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance. From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Mon Nov 22 03:41:47 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B5B528C0D6 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 03:41:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.649 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.300, BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fgssgL-HX-5d for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 03:41:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:7:216:3eff:fe67:11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 585BF3A69A3 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 03:41:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 605) id AB21719DB36; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 11:42:39 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (mail.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1269819DABE for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 11:42:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.lysator.liu.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FF034001F; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:42:34 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix, from userid 1674) id 4BBC940023; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:42:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from stalhein.lysator.liu.se (stalhein.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.204]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.lysator.liu.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2666B4001F; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:42:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from stalhein.lysator.liu.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by stalhein.lysator.liu.se (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oAMBgXSH025352; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:42:33 +0100 (MET) Received: (from nisse@localhost) by stalhein.lysator.liu.se (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4/Submit) id oAMBgX1k025351; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:42:33 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: stalhein.lysator.liu.se: nisse set sender to nisse@lysator.liu.se using -f From: nisse@lysator.liu.se (Niels =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=F6ller?=) To: Hanno =?iso-8859-1?Q?B=F6ck?= Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Subject: Re: RSA PSS in SSH? References: <201011220000.02230.hanno@hboeck.de> Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:42:33 +0100 In-Reply-To: <201011220000.02230.hanno@hboeck.de> ("Hanno =?iso-8859-1?Q?B?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?=F6ck=22's?= message of "Mon, 22 Nov 2010 00:00:01 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (usg-unix-v) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org Precedence: list Hanno Böck writes: > Are there any plans for a transition to RSASSA-PSS (as specified in pkcs #1 > 2.1)? Not that I am aware of. > (I saw that RFC 4253 already specifies the use of RSA-OAEP for encrypted key > exchange) My understanding is that the pkcs#1 v1.5 padding is a much more severe problem for encryption than for signing, mostly related to chosen ciphertext attacks. But I'm not a cryptologist. How important is it to obsolete v1.5 padding for signatures? What attacks are there? Regards, /Niels -- Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26. Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance. From bounces-ietf-ssh-owner-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive=lists.ietf.org@NetBSD.org Mon Nov 22 04:09:40 2010 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-secsh-tyoxbijeg7-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA6703A6A92 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 04:09:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.23 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.23 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.370, BAYES_20=-0.74, MANGLED_BACK=2.3, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NWxjnwsh8Zxl for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 04:09:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.NetBSD.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:3:7:216:3eff:fe67:11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EF1E3A6AD5 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 04:09:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix, from userid 605) id 55DCD19D679; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:10:32 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org Received: from zucker.schokokeks.org (zucker.schokokeks.org [78.46.69.5]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.netbsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6693F19D636 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 12:10:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from laverne.localnet (brln-4d0c3854.pool.mediaWays.net [::ffff:77.12.56.84]) (AUTH: PLAIN hanno-default@schokokeks.org, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by zucker.schokokeks.org with esmtp; Mon, 22 Nov 2010 13:10:24 +0100 id 000000000001C00C.000000004CEA5DB0.00000768 From: Hanno =?utf-8?q?B=C3=B6ck?= To: Niels =?utf-8?q?M=C3=B6ller?= Subject: Re: RSA PSS in SSH? Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 13:10:20 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.36; KDE/4.5.3; x86_64; ; ) Cc: ietf-ssh@netbsd.org References: <201011220000.02230.hanno@hboeck.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart3097425.piRoijeB3L"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201011221310.22376.hanno@hboeck.de> Sender: ietf-ssh-owner@NetBSD.org List-Id: ietf-ssh.NetBSD.org Precedence: list --nextPart3097425.piRoijeB3L Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am Monday 22 November 2010 schrieb Niels M=C3=B6ller: > My understanding is that the pkcs#1 v1.5 padding is a much more severe > problem for encryption than for signing, mostly related to chosen > ciphertext attacks. >=20 > But I'm not a cryptologist. How important is it to obsolete v1.5 padding > for signatures? What attacks are there? There are no attacks. It's purely an extra-safety measure. PSS has two advantages: First, it provides a security "proof" under the=20 asumption that the RSA problem itself is hard and the random oracle model.= =20 Roughly speaking, PKCS #1 1.5 padding has no known flaws, but you can't pro= ove=20 that it doesn't have flaws - with PSS, you can. The other thing is that PSS adds randomization - this often makes=20 implementation flaws harder to exploit (for example fault-based attacks). So there is no high pressure on implementing PSS, but it is a useful extra= =20 security measure on the long term. =2D-=20 Hanno B=C3=B6ck Blog: http://www.hboeck.de/ GPG: 3DBD3B20 Jabber/Mail: hanno@hboeck.de http://schokokeks.org - professional webhosting --nextPart3097425.piRoijeB3L Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkzqXa4ACgkQr2QksT29OyCEIwCeOAclBOqQ9Fz6Me1cysVYzeUe o7IAniVoTk9RL/ZQxK+LuzOEhIdmi8no =2qbT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart3097425.piRoijeB3L--