Subject: [Ietf-krb-wg] start-tls status

From: Leif Johansson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 22:51:03 +0100

Here is what I heard in the wg meeting today: Some people (sam, larry, jhutz) 
have discovered possible problems with FAST which makes jhutz unsure if FAST
is finished enough to go. For some reason there is a belief that those issues 
might also be relevant for start-tls but no one has been able to express that
to Simon. To make it worse the principals of FAST sais they don't have many
resources to spend on FAST.

Personally I think this isn't even close to a good enough reason to keep 
start-tls held up. IMO we should WGLC start-tls as an informational document.

	Cheers Leif
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

---

From: Jeffrey Hutzelman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 16:18:52 -0600

--On Tuesday, November 18, 2008 10:51:03 PM +0100 Leif Johansson 
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>
> Here is what I heard in the wg meeting today: Some people (sam, larry,
> jhutz)  have discovered possible problems with FAST which makes jhutz
> unsure if FAST is finished enough to go.

No.  Sam and Larry found real problems affecting FAST, which were discussed 
in Dublin extensively in a hallway discussion and IIRC briefly in the WG 
meeting.  Sam described the issues for the mailing list on July 31.  One of 
the outcomes was the new section in the anon document which describes how 
the KDC must select the TGT session key in an anonymous PKINIT exchange.

I don't think FAST is ready because I'm hearing from the document authors 
that it's not ready, and because I'm hearing mixed messages from them as to 
how close it is and when it might be ready.

> For some reason there is a
> belief that those issues  might also be relevant for start-tls but no one
> has been able to express that to Simon.

In the same message to which I referred above, Sam raised the question as 
to whether similar issues affected STARTTLS, and to what extent.  There was 
exactly one response to that message, which was from Gareth Richards and 
specifically related to OTP.

> To make it worse the principals
> of FAST sais they don't have many resources to spend on FAST.

One of the principal authors says that, which is new information I've only 
just received this week.  As a result, I'm now looking for a co-author to 
help Larry finish this document.

While STARTTLS does need to be analyzed to determine whether the same 
problems described in Sam's message apply when it is used, that is not the 
primary reason the document has not been published.  The document has not 
been published because we've been unable to come to consensus on an 
intended status.  Any other issues that have come up have generally been 
resolved in a timely fashion, leaving the intended-status question as the 
only blocking issue on multiple occasions.

-- Jeff

---

From: Nicolas Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:22:49 -0600

> only blocking issue on multiple occasions.

I've not looked at STARTTLS in a while, but I'd like to see:

1) channel binding from pre-auth to the TLS channel;
2) reply keys derived from the TLS channel.

Nico
--

---

From: Simon Josefsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 02:03:47 +0100

> 1) channel binding from pre-auth to the TLS channel;

What's missing from section 3 below?

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-josefsson-kerberos5-starttls-03#section-3

> 2) reply keys derived from the TLS channel.

I believe that is beyond the scope of krb5starttls.  However, there are
several other document in this area, what's missing from
draft-ietf-tls-extractor, currently in WGLC?

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tls-extractor-03
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg03033.html

/Simon

---

From: Leif Johansson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:04:13 +0100

> only blocking issue on multiple occasions.

I've heard the author say he doesn't care that much if it is experimental or 
informational. I've seen several votes for informational on this list....

	Cheers Leif