Brad,
Stephen,

Below was your original question, which I've attempted to answer in as 
straightforward a manner as possible, including illustrative examples from 
recent history.  Detecting mis-issuance of certificates through public logging 
of such is the stated goal of the I-D.
The I-D fails to describe what constitutes mis-issuance. there appears to be many examples where Web PKI CAs issue certs that do not comply with RFC 5280 (see the WPKOPS WG). Are those certs mis-issued? Or, are certs that are syntactically valid, maybe even
5280-compliant, but issued to the "wrong" subject mis-issued? or, ...

The I-D needs to be more precise in defining. Logging, per se, permits folks who monitor logs to detect mis-issuance, but does not solve the problems caused by mis-issuance. If detection were sufficient, then there would be no need for TLS clients to reject certs w/o SCTs (as mandated by the current I-D). I'm guessing that there is a notion of how the various elements of CT work together to address the problems that result from mis-issuance, but the
I-D fails to articulate this notion. That's a serious omission.
The complex nature of X.509/PKIX and the surrounding technology ecosystem and 
the history of vulnerabilities in such demonstrates that including everything 
in the log except that which MUST be excluded furthers that goal.  There is not 
a specific threat model nor any need to articulate one.
For several years it has been common practice to require a threat model for new security efforts in the IETF. Why do uyou believe that TRANS should be an exception?
  We desire a technology that is useful against as many threats to the broad 
certificate ecosystem as possible, including those yet to be formally 
anticipated.
The scope here is essentially the Web PKI used with TLS, primarily as used by in browsers; it is not all possible uses of certs with IETF security protocols. So the "broad certificate ecosystem" is not universal, right?

Steve

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

Reply via email to