In terms of my concerns, if Step 7 said "Verify and Decrypt the COSE object using the Recipient Key as per RFC 5116 Section 2.2" that would fill in the confusion for this reader.

Yours,
Joel

On 2/23/18 5:26 AM, Göran Selander wrote:
Hi Joel,

Thanks for your review. Comments inline.


On 2018-02-22 04:51, "Joel Halpern" <j...@joelhalpern.com> wrote:

Reviewer: Joel Halpern
Review result: Ready with Nits

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-core-object-security-08
Reviewer: Joel Halpern
Review Date: 2018-02-21
IETF LC End Date: 2018-03-02
IESG Telechat date: 2018-03-08

Summary: This document is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard RFC

Major issues: N/A

Minor issues:
    In section 8.2 on verifying the request, step 5 says to "compose" the
    Additional Authentication Data.  I would have expected it to be
"verify"
    the Additional Authentication Data.  I could imagine that the
verification
    consists of composing what it should be, and then comparing with what
is
    received.  But I do not see the comparison step.  is it implicit in
some
    other step?  This occurs again in 8.4, so I presume I am simply
missing
    something.  This may suggest some clarification could be useful.

The AAD is indeed “composed" both on encrypting and decrypting side from
data which needs to be known to the endpoint at the time when the AEAD
operation is performed. The authenticated decryption process is described
in:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5116#section-2.2

So the verification consists of feeding the input, including the AAD, to
the authenticated decryption which calculates the plain text or FAIL, and
a failure may be - but is not necessarily - caused by wrong AAD.

The AD review also indicated that we should move the reference to RFC 5116
to an early section in the draft and that change is already included in
the latest version on the CoRE WG Github.


Best regards
Göran


_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Reply via email to