Please look at this and see if you think it covers the required changes.

https://github.com/cose-wg/cose-spec/pull/150

jim


> -----Original Message-----
> From: COSE [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Göran Selander
> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 6:52 AM
> To: Jim Schaad <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [COSE] FW: I-D Action: draft-ietf-cose-msg-12.txt
> 
> Hi Jim
> 
> A couple of questions related to applying COSE rather than issues with the 
> draft
> itself.
> 
> 1. As you know we are looking at building security protocols using COSE.
> For EDHOC we need to support X.509 certificate based authentication of the DH
> exchange. With PSK and RPK, which is currently described, EDHOC is an
> exchange of COSE messages. What would be a natural way to include a public
> key certificate in a COSE_Sign1 object, the public key of the certificate 
> intended
> to be used by the recipient to verify the signature of the COSE object?
> 
> 
> 2. Another thing we discussed previously was the detailed specification for
> deriving the shared secret with ECDH, analogously to section 7.3.3 of
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tls-tls13-12
> 
> I note in section 12.4.1
> 
> " The mathematics for Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman can be found in
>    [RFC6090].  In this document the algorithm is extended to be used
>    with the two curves defined in [RFC7748].
> 
>    ECDH is parameterized by the following:
> 
>    o  Curve Type/Curve: The curve selected controls not only the size of
>       the shared secret, but the mathematics for computing the shared
>       secret. “
> 
> 
> There are at least two kinds of shared secret, one is a point on a curve, 
> denoted
> g^(j*k) in RFC6090, or alternatively a coordinate. Another is the byte string
> derived from g^(j*k) or its coordinate, used for subsequent key derivation.  
> The
> former is defined with the curve, but not necessarily the latter.
> 
> For example in the case of RFC7748, section 6.1, "Alice and Bob can then use a
> key-derivation
>    function that includes K, K_A, and K_B to derive a symmetric key.”
> 
> 
> Section 11 in draft-ietf-cose-msg nicely describes the key derivation given 
> the
> shared secret, but I can’t find the reference to the exact procedure for 
> obtaining
> the shared secret starting from this draft.
> 
> Not insisting on it be included in this draft. For now I just want a 
> confirmation
> that I haven’t missed something.
> 
> 
> Göran
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 2016-05-13 02:41, "COSE on behalf of Jim Schaad" <[email protected]
> on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:
> 
> >I believe that this draft represents all of the decisions that were
> >taken at BA.  I have been through the draft a couple of times to look
> >for problems and I believe that it is now ready for a working group
> >last call.
> >
> >Jim
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: COSE [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of internet-
> >> [email protected]
> >> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 5:20 PM
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Cc: [email protected]
> >> Subject: [COSE] I-D Action: draft-ietf-cose-msg-12.txt
> >>
> >>
> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> >directories.
> >> This draft is a work item of the CBOR Object Signing and Encryption
> >>of the
> >IETF.
> >>
> >>         Title           : CBOR Encoded Message Syntax
> >>         Author          : Jim Schaad
> >>    Filename        : draft-ietf-cose-msg-12.txt
> >>    Pages           : 112
> >>    Date            : 2016-05-12
> >>
> >> Abstract:
> >>    Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) is data format designed
> >>    for small code size and small message size.  There is a need for the
> >>    ability to have the basic security services defined for this data
> >>    format.  This document specifies processing for signatures, message
> >>    authentication codes, and encryption using CBOR.  This document also
> >>    specifies a representation for cryptographic keys using CBOR.
> >>
> >>
> >> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-msg/
> >>
> >> There's also a htmlized version available at:
> >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cose-msg-12
> >>
> >> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> >> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-cose-msg-12
> >>
> >>
> >> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> >submission
> >> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> >>
> >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> COSE mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >COSE mailing list
> >[email protected]
> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
> 
> _______________________________________________
> COSE mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose

_______________________________________________
COSE mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose

Reply via email to