Hi Greg, Can you send the SPEKE proposal that was mentioned earlier?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 25, 2016, at 11:31 AM, Greg Zaverucha <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Josh: In a security 2.0 deployment, PSK is only used for onboarding/claiming. 
> In a security 1.0 deployment apps could choose to use it however they want.
>  
> Ken: deprecation will follow the regular AllJoyn deprecation process.  Here’s 
> my understanding of the timeline: PSK will be annotated as deprecated in 
> 16.04.  It will be supported for two releases, then still present but 
> unsupported for another two.
>  
> Greg
>  
> From: Josh Spain [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 11:22 AM
> To: Swinson, Ken <[email protected]>
> Cc: Lioy, Marcello <[email protected]>; Greg Zaverucha 
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Allseen-core] [AllSeen Alliance TSC] Deprecation (and 
> replacement) of ECDHE_PSK
>  
> Greg,
>  
> Can you describe the scenarios other than during onboarding in which 
> ECDHE_PSK is currently or would potentially be used in AllJoyn?
>  
> Thanks,
> Josh
>  
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Swinson, Ken <[email protected]> wrote:
> We discussed the planned deprecation of ECDHE_PSK on an HAE working group 
> call this AM.  A concern was raised regarding how quickly ECDHE_PSK will be 
> deprecated.  I recall from the core working group calls that there is a 
> desire to deprecate this feature quickly once this new authentication method 
> is added.
>  
> The concern raised by HAE group is that they are launching their service 
> frameworks on core 15.09 and will be using ECDHE_PSK for authentication.  
> They need to plan a transition to the new method while supporting released 
> products using ECDHE_PSK.
>  
> I looked for and did not find a jira ticket tracking the deprecation of 
> ECDHE_PSK.  Is there one?
>  
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lioy, 
> Marcello
> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2015 2:58 PM
> To: Greg Zaverucha; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; 
> [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [AllSeen Alliance TSC] Deprecation (and replacement) of ECDHE_PSK
>  
> As there has been no responses to this the Working Group decided in the call 
> today to in fact deprecate this authentication mechanism.  Thanks to Greg for 
> driving the proves and volunteering to do the work.
>  
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Greg 
> Zaverucha
> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 2:23 PM
> To: [email protected];  
> [email protected]; 
> [email protected]
> Subject: [Allseen-core] Deprecation (and replacement) of ECDHE_PSK
>  
> The core working group discussed today whether to mark ECDHE_PSK as 
> deprecated in 16.04, and have a new mechanism called ECDHE_SPEKE replace it.  
> Information about the new mechanism is here:  
> https://jira.allseenalliance.org/browse/ASACORE-2055 .  The main difference 
> between SPEKE and PSK is that SPEKE is secure even when the pre-shared secret 
> is a low-entropy password, while for PSK the peers must share a key with high 
> entropy (ideally, 128 bits).
>  
> The reasons for deprecation are
> -          There is no use case that ECDHE_PSK addresses that ECDHE_SPEKE 
> doesn’t.  The primary use case for PSK in Security 2.0 is onboarding, and 
> SPEKE is appropriate for this use case.
> 
> -          ECDHE_PSK is easy to misuse, if an app uses a short password 
> instead of a high entropy key, security is lost.
> 
> -          Having two ways to do similar things causes confusion, complicates 
> the code (and increases TC memory footprint)
> 
>  
> Consensus on the call was to go ahead with deprecation, this email is to give 
> those that weren’t on the call a chance to weigh in.  We’ll finalize the 
> decision on the core WG call next Thursday (Dec. 10th).  If you have concerns 
> about this change, please voice them before then.
>  
> Greg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Allseen-core mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.allseenalliance.org/mailman/listinfo/allseen-core
> 
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Allseen-core mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.allseenalliance.org/mailman/listinfo/allseen-core
_______________________________________________
Allseen-core mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.allseenalliance.org/mailman/listinfo/allseen-core

Reply via email to