The Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps) WG in the Security Area of the IETF has been rechartered. For additional information, please contact the Area Directors or the WG Chair.
Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Current status: Active WG Chairs: Russ Housley <hous...@vigilsec.com> Assigned Area Director: Eric Rescorla <e...@rtfm.com> Security Area Directors: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.i...@gmail.com> Eric Rescorla <e...@rtfm.com> Mailing list: Address: sp...@ietf.org To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm Archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spasm/ Group page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/lamps/ Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-lamps/ The PKIX and S/MIME Working Groups have been closed for some time. Some updates have been proposed to the X.509 certificate documents produced by the PKIX Working Group and the electronic mail security documents produced by the S/MIME Working Group. The LAMPS (Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME) Working Group is chartered to make updates where there is a known constituency interested in real deployment and there is at least one sufficiently well specified approach to the update so that the working group can sensibly evaluate whether to adopt a proposal. Having completed the S/MIME 4.0 specifications and updates to support i18n email addresses in PKIX certificates, the LAMPS WG is now tackling these topics: 1. Specify a discovery mechanism for CAA records to replace the one described in RFC 6844. 2. Specify the use of SHAKE128/256 and SHAKE256/512 for PKIX and S/MIME. RFC 6844 describes the mechanism by which CAA records relating to a domain are discovered. Implementation experience has demonstrated an ambiguity in the current processing of CNAME and DNAME records during discovery. Subsequent discussion has suggested that a different discovery approach would resolve limitations inherent in the current approach. Unlike the previous hashing standards, the SHA-3 family of functions are the outcome of an open competition. They have a clear design rationale and have received a lot of public analysis, which gives great confidence that the SHA-3 family of functions are secure. Also, since SHA-3 uses a very different construction from SHA-2, the SHA-3 family of functions offers an excellent alternative. In particular, SHAKE128/256 and SHAKE256/512 offer security and performance benefits. In addition, the LAMPS Working Group may investigate other updates to the documents produced by the PKIX and S/MIME Working Groups, but the LAMPS Working Group shall not adopt any of these potential work items without rechartering. Milestones: Apr 2018 - Adopt a draft for rfc6844bis Apr 2018 - Adopt a PKIX draft for SHAKE128/256 and SHAKE256/512 Apr 2018 - Adopt a S/MIME draft for SHAKE128/256 and SHAKE256/512 Apr 2018 - rfc6844bis sent to IESG for standards track publication Sep 2018 - SHAKE128/256 and SHAKE256/512 for PKIX sent to IESG for standards track publication Sep 2018 - SHAKE128/256 and SHAKE256/512 for S/MIME sent to IESG for standards track publication