I created PR that I think captures these suggestions and another editorial
fix - https://github.com/emu-wg/draft-ietf-emu-eap-tls13/pull/87

Cheers,

Joe

On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 9:36 AM Oleg Pekar <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 8:31 AM Mohit Sethi M <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Oleg, Joe, all,
>> On 7/8/21 8:06 AM, Joseph Salowey wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 10:08 PM Joseph Salowey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:11 AM Oleg Pekar <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I still see unclearness in Section "2.2. Identity Verification", I'm
>>>> trying to look from the implementer's perspective.
>>>>
>>>> 1) "Since EAP-TLS deployments may use more than one EAP
>>>>    server, each with a different certificate, EAP peer implementations
>>>>    SHOULD allow for the configuration of a unique trusted root (CA
>>>>    certificate) to authenticate the server certificate and one or more
>>>>    server names to match against the SubjectAltName (SAN) extension in
>>>>    the server certificate.  To simplify name matching, an EAP-TLS
>>>>    deployment can assign a name to represent an authorized EAP server
>>>>    and EAP Server certificates can include this name in the list of SANs
>>>>    for each certificate that represents an EAP-TLS server."
>>>>
>>>> --- question: Should the server name match *any* of SAN extensions in
>>>> the server certificate? If so - then suggest to say this explicitly.
>>>>
>>>>
>> [Joe] DOes adding the following sentence help?
>>
>> "If any of the configured names match any of the names in the SAN
>> extension then the name check passes."
>>
>> This makes sense. I will update the draft in github.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> [Joe] yes the behavior is to match any.
>>>
>>>
>>>> 2) "If server
>>>>    name matching is not used, then peers may end up trusting servers for
>>>>    EAP authentication that are not intended to be EAP servers for the
>>>>    network."
>>>>
>>>> --- question: It looks like a warning, right? Suggest to make it more
>>>> explicit. Something like "If server name matching is not used, then it
>>>> essentially decreases the level of security of peer's authentication since
>>>> the peer may end up trusting servers for EAP authentication that are not
>>>> intended to be EAP servers for the network."
>>>>
>>>>
>>> [Joe] Thanks, I think that is better wording.
>>>
>> I find the text a little hard to parse. I am not sure how comfortable we
>> are with defining "levels" of security. Also, "peer's authentication" might
>> confuse the reader since we are talking about server name matching. I don't
>> really have a better suggestion. Perhaps something along the lines: .... it
>> essentially degrades the peer's confidence that the EAP server with which
>> it is interacting is authoritative for the given network....??
>>
> Mohit, this wording makes sense, thanks!
>
> --Mohit
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Oleg
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 2:26 AM Joseph Salowey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This is the working group last-call (WGLC) for draft-ietf-emu-eap-tls13.
>>>>> Please review the draft, focus on the changes since the last WGLC and
>>>>> submit your comments to the list by July 8, 2021.
>>>>>
>>>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-emu-eap-tls13/
>>>>>
>>>>> There is also an htmlized version available at:
>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-emu-eap-tls13-17
>>>>>
>>>>> A diff from the previous WGLC version (-15):
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org//rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-emu-eap-tls13-17&url2=draft-ietf-emu-eap-tls13-15
>>>>>
>>>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-emu-eap-tls13-17
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Joe
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Emu mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
>>>>>
>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Emu mailing [email protected]https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
Emu mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu

Reply via email to