WG Review: Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps)

[The IESG]

The Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps) WG in the
Security Area of the IETF is undergoing rechartering. The IESG has not made
any determination yet. The following draft charter was submitted, and is
provided for informational purposes only. Please send your comments to the
IESG mailing list (i...@ietf.org) by 2021-05-15.

Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps)
---
Current status: Active WG

Chairs:
  Russ Housley 
  Tim Hollebeek 

Assigned Area Director:
  Roman Danyliw 

Security Area Directors:
  Benjamin Kaduk 
  Roman Danyliw 

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.

The LAMPS WG is now tackling these topics:

1. Specify the use of short-lived X.509 certificates for which no
revocation information is made available by the Certification Authority.
Short-lived certificates have a lifespan that is shorter than the time
needed to detect, report, and distribute revocation information.  As a
result, revoking short-lived certificates is unnecessary and pointless.

2. Update the specification for the cryptographic protection of email
headers -- both for signatures and encryption -- to improve the
implementation situation with respect to privacy, security, usability
and interoperability in cryptographically-protected electronic mail.
Most current implementations of cryptographically-protected electronic
mail protect only the body of the message, which leaves significant
room for attacks against otherwise-protected messages.

3. The Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) is specified in RFC 4210,
and it offers a vast range of certificate management options.  CMP is
currently being used in many different industrial environments, but it
needs to be tailored to the specific needs of such machine-to-machine
scenarios and communication among PKI management entities.  The LAMPS
WG will develop a "lightweight" profile of CMP to more efficiently
support of these environments and better facilitate interoperable
implementation, while preserving cryptographic algorithm agility.  In
addition, necessary updates and clarifications to CMP will be
specified in a separate document.  This work will be coordinated with
the LWIG WG.

4. Provide concrete guidance for implementers of email user agents to
promote interoperability of end-to-end cryptographic protection of
email messages.  This may include guidance about the generation,
interpretation, and handling of protected messages; management of
the relevant certificates; documentation of how to avoid common
failure modes; strategies for deployment in a mixed environment; as
well as test vectors and examples that can be used by implementers
and interoperability testing.  The resulting robust consensus
among email user agent implementers is expected to provide more
usable and useful cryptographic security for email users.

5. Recent progress in the development of quantum computers pose a
threat to widely deployed public key algorithms.  As a result,
there is a need to prepare for a day when cryptosystems such as
RSA, Diffie-Hellman, ECDSA, ECDH, and EdDSA cannot be depended
upon in the PKIX and S/MIME protocols.

5.a. The US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
has a Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) effort to produce one or more
quantum-resistant public-key cryptographic algorithm standards.
The LAMPS WG will specify the use of these new PQC public key
algorithms with the PKIX certificates and the Cryptographic Message
Syntax (CMS). These specifications will use object identifiers
for the new algorithms that are assigned by NIST.

5.b. NIST and other organizations are developing standards for
post-quantum cryptographic (PQC) algorithms that that will be
secure even if large-scale quantum computers are ever developed.
However, a lengthy transition from today's public key algorithms to
PQC public key algorithms is expected; time will be needed to gain
full confidence in the new PQC public key algorithms.

5.b.i. The LAMPS WG will specify formats, identifiers, enrollment,
and operational practices for "hybrid key establishment" that
combines the shared secret 

WG Review: Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps)

[The IESG]

The Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps) WG in the
Security Area of the IETF is undergoing rechartering. The IESG has not made
any determination yet. The following draft charter was submitted, and is
provided for informational purposes only. Please send your comments to the
IESG mailing list (i...@ietf.org) by 2019-11-11.

Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps)
---
Current status: Active WG

Chairs:
  Russ Housley 
  Tim Hollebeek 

Assigned Area Director:
  Roman Danyliw 

Security Area Directors:
  Benjamin Kaduk 
  Roman Danyliw 

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.

The LAMPS WG is now tackling these topics:

1. Specify the use of short-lived X.509 certificates for which no
revocation information is made available by the Certification Authority.
Short-lived certificates have a lifespan that is shorter than the time
needed to detect, report, and distribute revocation information.  As a
result, revoking short-lived certificates is unnecessary and pointless.

2. Update the specification for the cryptographic protection of email
headers -- both for signatures and encryption -- to improve the
implementation situation with respect to privacy, security, usability
and interoperability in cryptographically-protected electronic mail.
Most current implementations of cryptographically-protected electronic
mail protect only the body of the message, which leaves significant
room for attacks against otherwise-protected messages.

3. The Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) is specified in RFC 4210,
and it offers a vast range of certificate management options.  CMP is
currently being used in many different industrial environments, but it
needs to be tailored to the specific needs of some environments.  The
LAMPS WG will develop a "lightweight" profile of CMP to more efficiently
support of these environments and better facilitate interoperable
implementation, while preserving cryptographic algorithm agility.  In
addition, necessary updates and clarifications to CMP will be specified
in a separate document.  This work will be coordinated with the LWIG WG.

In addition, the LAMPS WG may investigate other updates to documents
produced by the PKIX and S/MIME WG. The LAMPS WG may produce
clarifications where needed, but the LAMPS WG shall not adopt
anything beyond clarifications without rechartering.

Milestones:

  Nov 2019 - Adopt a draft for short-lived certificate conventions

  Dec 2019 - Adopt a draft for header protection conventions

  Dec 2019 - Adopt a draft for CMP updates

  Dec 2019 - Adopt a draft for Lightweight CMP profile

  Nov 2020 - Short-lived certificate conventions sent to IESG for BCP
  publication

  Nov 2020 - CMP updates sent to IESG for  standards track publication

  Nov 2020 - Lightweight CMP profile sent to IESG for informational
  publication

  Mar 2021 - Header protection conventions sent to IESG for standards track
  publication


___
IETF-Announce mailing list
IETF-Announce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce

WG Review: Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps)

[The IESG]

The Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps) WG in the
Security Area of the IETF is undergoing rechartering. The IESG has not made
any determination yet. The following draft charter was submitted, and is
provided for informational purposes only. Please send your comments to the
IESG mailing list (i...@ietf.org) by 2019-05-13.

Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps)
---
Current status: Active WG

Chairs:
  Russ Housley 
  Tim Hollebeek 

Assigned Area Director:
  Roman Danyliw 

Security Area Directors:
  Benjamin Kaduk 
  Roman Danyliw 

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.

The LAMPS WG is now tackling these topics:

1. Specify a discovery mechanism for CAA records to replace the one
described in RFC 6844.  Implementation experience has demonstrated an
ambiguity in the handling of CNAME and DNAME records during discovery
in RFC 6844, and subsequent discussion has suggested that a different
discovery approach would resolve limitations inherent in the approach
used in RFC 6844.

2. Specify the use of SHAKE128/256 and SHAKE256/512 for PKIX and S/MIME.
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, giving 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.

3. Specify the use of short-lived X.509 certificates for which no
revocation information is made available by the Certification Authority.
Short-lived certificates have a lifespan that is shorter than the time
needed to detect, report, and distribute revocation information.  As a
result, revoking short-lived certificates is unnecessary and pointless.

4. Specify the use of a pre-shared key (PSK) along with other key
management techniques with supported by the Cryptographic Message
Syntax (CMS) as a mechanism to protect present day communication from
the future invention of a large-scale quantum computer.  The invention
of a large-scale quantum computer poses a serious challenge for the key
management algorithms that are widely deployed today, especially the
key transport and key agreement algorithms used today with the CMS to
protect S/MIME messages.

5. Specify the use of hash-based signatures with the Cryptographic
Message Syntax (CMS).  Hash-based signature use small private and
public keys, and they have low computational cost; however, the
signature values are quite large.  For this reason they might not be
used for signing X.509 certificates or S/MIME messages; however, since
hash-based signature algorithms are secure even if a large-scale
quantum computer is invented.  The low computational cost for
signature verification makes hash-based signatures attractive in the
Internt of Things environments, and the quantum resistance makes them
attractive for the distribution of software updates.

6. Specify a certificate extension that is carried in a self-signed
certificate for a trust anchor, which is often called a Root
Certification Authority (CA) certificate, to identify the next
public key that will be used by the trust anchor.

7. Update the specification for the cryptographic protection of email
headers -- both for signatures and encryption -- to improve the
implementation situation with respect to privacy, security, usability
and interoperability in cryptographically-protected electronic mail.
Most current implementations of cryptographically-protected electronic
mail protect only the body of the message, which leaves significant
room for attacks against otherwise-protected messages.

In addition, the LAMPS WG may investigate other updates to documents
produced by the PKIX and S/MIME WGs, but the LAMPS WG shall not adopt
any of these potential work items without rechartering.

Milestones:

  Jun 2018 - Adopt a draft for short-lived certificate conventions

  Jun 2018 - Adopt a draft 

WG Review: Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps)

[The IESG]

The Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps) WG in the
Security Area of the IETF is undergoing rechartering. The IESG has not made
any determination yet. The following draft charter was submitted, and is
provided for informational purposes only. Please send your comments to the
IESG mailing list (i...@ietf.org) by 2018-06-06.

Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps)
---
Current status: Active WG

Chairs:
  Russ Housley 
  Timothy Hollebeek 

Assigned Area Director:
  Eric Rescorla 

Security Area Directors:
  Eric Rescorla 
  Benjamin Kaduk 

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.

The LAMPS WG is now tackling these topics:

1. Specify a discovery mechanism for CAA records to replace the one
described in RFC 6844.  Implementation experience has demonstrated an
ambiguity in the handling of CNAME and DNAME records during discovery
in RFC 6844, and subsequent discussion has suggested that a different
discovery approach would resolve limitations inherent in that approach.

2. Specify the use of SHAKE128/256 and SHAKE256/512 for PKIX and S/MIME.
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, giving 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.

3. Specify the use of short-lived X.509 certificates for which no
revocation information is made available by the Certification Authority.
Short-lived certificates have a lifespan that is shorter than the time
needed to detect, report, and distribute revocation information, as a
result revoking them pointless.

4. Specify the use of a pre-shared key (PSK) along with other key
management techniques with supported by the Cryptographic Message
Syntax (CMS) as a near-term mechanism to protect present day
communication from the future invention of a large-scale quantum
computer.  The invention of a such a quantum computer would pose a
serious challenge for the key management algorithms that are widely
deployed, especially the key transport and key agreement algorithms
used today with the CMS to protect S/MIME messages.

5. Specify the use of hash-based signatures with the Cryptographic
Message Syntax (CMS).  A hash-based signature uses small private and
public keys, and it has low computational cost; however, the signature
values are quite large.  For this reason they might not be used for
signing X.509 certificates or S/MIME messages, but they are secure
even if a large-scale quantum computer is invented.  These properties
make hash-based signatures useful in some environments, such a the
distribution of software updates.

6. Specifies a certificate extension that is carried in a self-signed
certificate for a trust anchor, which is often called a Root
Certification Authority (CA) certificate, to identify the next
public key that will be used by the trust anchor.

In addition, the LAMPS WG may investigate other updates to documents
produced by the PKIX and S/MIME WGs, but the LAMPS WG shall not adopt
any of these potential work items without rechartering.

Milestones:

  Jun 2018 - Adopt a draft for short-lived certificate conventions

  Jun 2018 - Adopt a draft for the CMS with PSK

  Jun 2018 - Adopt a draft for hash-based signatures with the CMS

  Jun 2018 - Adopt a draft for root key rollover certificate extension

  Jul 2018 - rfc6844bis sent to IESG for standards track publication

  Aug 2018 - Root key rollover certificate extension sent to IESG for
  informational 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

  Oct 2018 - Short-lived certificate conventions sent to IESG for BCP
  publication

  Oct 2018 - The CMS with PSK sent to 

WG Review: Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps)

[The IESG]

The Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps) WG in the
Security Area of the IETF is undergoing rechartering. The IESG has not made
any determination yet. The following draft charter was submitted, and is
provided for informational purposes only. Please send your comments to the
IESG mailing list (i...@ietf.org) by 2018-02-19.

Limited Additional Mechanisms for PKIX and SMIME (lamps)
---
Current status: Active WG

Chairs:
  Russ Housley 

Assigned Area Director:
  Eric Rescorla 

Security Area Directors:
  Kathleen Moriarty 
  Eric Rescorla 

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