Internet Info 1997 December/Internet_Info_CD-ROM_Walnut_Creek_December_1997.iso/ietf/94jul/area.security.94jul.txt

Text File | 1994-11-02 | 12KB | 272 lines

Security Area

Director:


   o Jeff Schiller:  [e-mail]


Area Summary reported by Jeff Schiller/MIT and Jim Galvin/TIS

The Security Area within the IETF is responsible for development of
security-oriented protocols, security review of RFCs, development of
candidate policies and review of operational security on the Internet.

During the Security Area Advisory Group (SAAG) meeting Jeff Schiller
announced the creation of the Security Area Directorate.  The
directorate will assist the area director as needed, including
considering the strategic evolution of security in the Internet,
providing security-specific architectural and engineering guidance to
working groups and reviewing Internet-Drafts.  It is an advisory entity
and has no standards-setting powers.

The members of the Security Area Directorate are as follows.


            Jeffrey I. Schiller    [e-mail]
            Ran Atkinson           [e-mail]
            Steve Bellovin         [e-mail]
            Steve Crocker          [e-mail]
            Barbara Fraser         [e-mail]
            James M. Galvin        [e-mail]
            Phil Karn              [e-mail]
            Steve Kent             [e-mail]
            John Linn              [e-mail]
            Clifford Neuman        [e-mail]
            Rob Shirey             [e-mail]
            Ted Ts'o               [e-mail]


During the SAAG meeting, the activities of the Security Area, including
the directorate, will be reported and discussed.  In addition, the SAAG
meeting will provide an opportunity for open discussion of security
issues.

Included below is a summary from those working groups with
security-relevant activities to report and the Security Area Directorate
meeting summary.  The following topics were discussed during the SAAG
meeting.


Security Area Vision

Jeff Schiller volunteered to do the first draft of a Security Area
Vision.  It will be short (perhaps 2-4 pages) and will provide a first
cut at defining a common vision of how security technology will evolve
on the Internet.  The SAAG will contribute to this vision, and when it
is complete, it will be published as an Informational RFC.

Jeff started a discussion of the contents of the vision by suggesting
that the DNS solved the naming problems of the Internet.  This prompted
a great deal of discussion that surfaced all the usual issues, including
management, usability, and the fact that the DNS is not the only kind of
name space.  Steve Bellovin was quick to point out that in spite of
whatever perceived shortcomings may exist in the DNS, the Internet has
ten years of operational experience with it; we should be very careful
about suggesting any replacements.

There was consensus that support for globally unique names in the
Internet was required.  Other issues for inclusion in the vision include
the realization that the Internet today is vulnerable to significant
security attacks, including passive attacks that have been recently
referred to as ``sniffer'' attacks.  This realization will inevitably
lead to the elimination of the use of clear-text passwords and the need
for support of authentication and encryption services.


FNC Security Council

Jeff Schiller reported that Dennis Steinhauer and Steve Squires,
representing the FNC Security Council, have proposed a security policy
for the Internet.  Jeff will get it distributed to the IETF community
for review.


The activity of the following working groups was reported.


Common Authentication Technology Working Group (CAT)

The CAT Working Group met for two sessions in Toronto.  Carlisle Adams
gave a presentation on his Simple Public-Key Mechanism (SPKM) proposal,
a GSS-API mechanism being developed based on public-key technology and
offering 2-way and 3-way authentication exchange variants, generalized
use of OIDs for flexibility, parameter negotiation, and provision for
non-repudiation services.  Rough consensus was reached on outstanding
issues of GSS-API buffer sizes, continuation processing of long messages
(not accepted), and context expiration (for K-V5, hard expiration not to
exceed supporting ticket lifetimes), pending review on the mailing list.
Advancement of FTP security is pending revision of the Internet-Draft
against outstanding comments.


Domain Name System Security Working Group (DNSSEC)

This meeting was dedicated to a discussion of the differences between
the two proposals under consideration:  Eastlake/Kaufman and Ohta.
Although no consensus was reached on any of the issues, there was at
least a few minutes discussion of all of the outstanding issues.  The
discussion will continue on the mailing list with the objective of
achieving consensus on a proposal for DNS security.


Internet Protocol Security Protocol Working Group (IPSEC)

The IPSEC Working Group met twice in Toronto.  The first meeting focused
on the definition of a cryptographic security protocol to protect client
protocols of IP. Several implementations of network layer cryptographic
security were discussed.  Formats and features of various specifications
and proposals were compared (SP3, NLSP, I-NLSP, swIPe).  The working
group has declared rough consensus on a protocol format based on the
consolidation of ideas from several experimental implementations.  The
IP Security Protocol (IPSP) has been designed to protect both IPv4 and
IPng.  Additional investigation of ``authentication-only'' services for
IPng require additional investigation.  These IPng services support the
examination of ``protected'' information by intermediate systems.  A
draft of the new IPSP specification is scheduled for the next IETF
meeting.

During the second meeting the requirements and possible mechanisms for
the Internet Key Management Protocol (IKMP) were discussed.  The IKMP
work is focused on the support of IPSP, not on key management in
general.  A draft of IKMP is scheduled for release prior to the next
meeting.  Additional work beyond the specification of IKMP is required
to coordinate the relationship of certificates and naming hierarchies to
the various Internet security mechanisms.


Privacy-Enhanced Electronic Mail Working Group (PEM)

The major focus of this meeting was review of two recent
Internet-Drafts:  ``Security Multiparts for MIME: Multipart/Signed and
Multipart/Encrypted'' and ``PEM Security Services and MIME.''

The first document, when stripped of those portions that the authors now
deem PEM-specific, will be quite brief.  The second document requires
considerable editing to address a number of issues raised during the
meeting, to add examples and to make the document independent of
RFC 1421.  The second Internet-Draft has addressed the major
canonicalization problems that plagued forwarded authentication in
previous drafts, but some details remain to be resolved.  There was
considerable debate over proposed name forms and unification of
originator and recipient ID formats, and work will be required by the
authors to address the concerns cited.  Minor issues relating to the
syntax for certificate lists, requirements for separate signature and
encryption certificates, etc., seem easier to resolve.


Trusted Network File Systems Working Group (TNFS)

A specification has been submitted and reviewed by Jeff Schiller.  As
soon as a revision is available it will be published as an Informational
RFC.


TELNET Working Group (TELNET) - Applications Area

See the directorate meeting summary below.


IP Routing for Wireless/Mobile Hosts Working Group (MOBILEIP) -
Routing Area

This group has not resolved the choice of using nonce- or
timestamp-based authentication.  They have adopted the use of MD5 and
are using manual key distribution, for now, due to the lack of a key
management system.


Site Security Handbook BOF (SSH) - User Services Area

A BOF was held this week that generated enough interest to create a
working group, chaired by Barbara Fraser, to revise the existing
document.  It was noted that the working group will produce two
documents:  one directed at system administrators and one directed at
end users.  Although the Site Security Handbook is a security-related
document, the working group will exist within the User Services Area.



The Security Area Directorate met for the first time on Monday afternoon
for a two hour meeting.  The following actions were adopted.


Common Authentication Technology Working Group (CAT)

The draft FTP security specification had been submitted for review prior
to publication.  Jeff Schiller reviewed the document and provided
comments back to the editor.  As soon as the editor revises the document
it can be resubmitted for publication as a Proposed Standard.


Domain Name System Security Working Group (DNSSEC)

This group is making progress at this time, so there is no action
required from the directorate.


Privacy-Enhanced Electronic Mail Working Group (PEM)

A final review of the PEM/MIME integration specifications is expected
during this week's PEM meeting.  Priority should be given to finding the
shortest path possible to publication of these documents as Proposed
Standards, which have been subject to many revisions over the last year.

After the documents have been submitted and accepted for publication,
the charter of this working group will be reviewed.

[Note:  This discussion about PEM/MIME preceded the PEM Working Group
meeting where issues arose requiring additional work by the document
editors.]


TELNET Working Group (TELNET) - Applications Area

What is the status of the TELNET authentication and encryption options?

It was reported that there exists a draft specification of each option
and an implementation.  However, the current encryption option is
vulnerable to an active attack.  A new draft incorporating both
authentication and encryption that is not vulnerable to an attack has
been proposed but has not been forthcoming.  The problem is that other
folks are implementing the draft encryption option in spite of its
vulnerability.

The TELNET Working Group is languishing due to the lack of time
available from the current chair.  Also, no one has volunteered to
update the currently available implementation to include the proposed
changes to protect against the attack.

While the Applications Area sorts out the status of the TELNET Working
Group, it was suggested that the existing encryption option
specification be resurrected, a section that explains the active attack
should be added and it should be published as an Experimental RFC.

Ted Ts'o has agreed to resurrect the specifications and Jeff Schiller
will write the caveat about the active attack.  The document will then
be submitted for publication as an Experimental RFC.

When the new proposal is available, it will be advanced on the standards
track.


Site Security Handbook BOF (SSH) - User Services Area

There is a BOF this week to resurrect the Site Security Handbook and
create a working group to revise it.  No directorate action is required
at this time.


Key Management

Key management is an issue that surfaces in many working groups and is
not receiving sufficient attention within the IETF. We agreed to create
a working group to address key management.  Steve Bellovin has
volunteered to chair the working group and Ran Atkinson agreed to create
the first draft of the charter.

It was noted that there has been progress licensing public key
technology (RSAREF in particular) for use in IPSEC and DNSSEC.