https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/current/msg03736.HTML

On Jan 16, 2014 2:17 PM, Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> well that is purely disgusting on what f'ing grounds was it denied? is there any doc info on that 'transaction' ???
>
> Cari Machet
> NYC 646-436-7795
> carimachet@gmail.com
> AIM carismachet
> Syria +963-099 277 3243
> Amman +962 077 636 9407
> Berlin +49 152 11779219
> Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet>
>
> Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the
> addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this
> information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without
> permission is strictly prohibited.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:12 PM, John L Grubbs <john@johnlgrubbs.net> wrote:
>>
>> Trevor's request was denied last week. :(
>>
>> On Jan 16, 2014 2:04 PM, Cari Machet <carimachet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> BEAUTIFUL
>>>
>>> Cari Machet
>>> NYC 646-436-7795
>>> carimachet@gmail.com
>>> AIM carismachet
>>> Syria +963-099 277 3243
>>> Amman +962 077 636 9407
>>> Berlin +49 152 11779219
>>> Twitter: @carimachet <https://twitter.com/carimachet>
>>>
>>> Ruh-roh, this is now necessary: This email is intended only for the
>>> addressee(s) and may contain confidential information. If you are not the
>>> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use of this
>>> information, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email without
>>> permission is strictly prohibited.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 8:50 PM, Moritz <moritz@headstrong.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/current/msg03554.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dear IRTF Chair, IAB, and CFRG:
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to request the removal of Kevin Igoe from CFRG co-chair.
>>>>
>>>> The Crypto Forum Research Group is chartered to provide crypto advice
>>>> to IETF Working Groups.  As CFRG co-chair for the last 2 years, Kevin
>>>> has shaped CFRG discussion and provided CFRG opinion to WGs.
>>>>
>>>> Kevin's handling of the "Dragonfly" protocol raises doubts that he is
>>>> performing these duties competently.  Additionally, Kevin's employment
>>>> with the National Security Agency raises conflict-of-interest
>>>> concerns.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dragonfly Background
>>>> ----
>>>> Dragonfly is a "Password-Authenticated Key Exchange" protocol (or
>>>> "PAKE").  Dragonfly was proposed to CFRG 2 years ago [PROPOSAL].
>>>> Compared to better-known PAKEs, Dragonfly has no security proof, a
>>>> lack of extensive security analysis, nonfunctional complications added
>>>> for IPR reasons, and some security issues [REVIEW].
>>>>
>>>> Dragonfly became a hot topic recently when the TLS WG disputed CFRG's
>>>> alleged report that Dragonfly was "satisfactory", as well as disputing
>>>> that this report reflected CFRG consensus [TLS_1].  After extensive
>>>> criticism of Dragonfly, the TLS WG ceased work on a Dragonfly
>>>> extension [TLS_2].
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> NSA Background
>>>> ----
>>>> The National Security Agency ("NSA") is a U.S. Intelligence Agency
>>>> which is believed to devote considerable resources to:
>>>>  - "Influence policies, standards and specifications for commercial
>>>> public key technologies"
>>>>  - "Shape the worldwide cryptography marketplace to make it more
>>>> tractable to advanced cryptanalytic capabilities" [BULLRUN]
>>>>
>>>> While much is unknown about these activities, the NSA is known to have
>>>> placed a "back door" in a NIST standard for random number generation
>>>> [ECDRBG].  A recent report from the President's Review Group
>>>> recommends that the NSA:
>>>>  - "fully support and not undermine efforts to create encryption standards"
>>>>  - "not in any way subvert, undermine, weaken, or make vulnerable
>>>> generally available commercial software" [PRESIDENTS]
>>>>
>>>> This suggests the NSA is currently behaving contrary to the recommendations.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Reasons for requesting Kevin's removal
>>>> ----
>>>> 1)  Kevin has provided the *ONLY* positive feedback for Dragonfly that
>>>> can be found on the CFRG mailing list or meeting minutes.  The
>>>> contrast between Kevin's enthusiasm and the group's skepticism is
>>>> striking [CFRG_SUMMARY].  It's unclear what this enthusiasm is based
>>>> on.  There's no record of Kevin making any effort to understand
>>>> Dragonfly's unusual structure, compare it to alternatives, consider
>>>> possible use cases, or construct a formal security analysis.
>>>>
>>>> 2)  Twice Kevin suggested a technique for deriving the Dragonfly
>>>> password-based element which would make the protocol easy to break
>>>> [IGOE_1, IGOE_2].  He also endorsed an ineffective attempt to avoid
>>>> timing attacks by adding extra iterations to one of the loops [IGOE_3,
>>>> IGOE_4].  These are surprising mistakes from an experienced
>>>> cryptographer.
>>>>
>>>> 3)  Kevin's approval of Dragonfly to the TLS WG misrepresented CFRG
>>>> consensus, which was skeptical of Dragonfly [CFRG_SUMMARY].
>>>>
>>>> 4)  Kevin's NSA affiliation raises unpleasant but unavoidable
>>>> questions regarding these actions.  It's entirely possible these are
>>>> just mistakes by a novice chair who lacks experience in a particular
>>>> sort of protocol and is being pressured by IETF participants to
>>>> endorse something.  But it's hard to escape an impression of
>>>> carelessness and unseriousness in Kevin's work.  One wonders whether
>>>> the NSA is happy to preside over this sort of sloppy crypto design.
>>>>
>>>> While that's of course speculation, it remains baffling that an
>>>> experienced cryptographer would champion such a shoddy protocol.  The
>>>> CFRG chairs have been silent for months, and haven't responded to
>>>> attempts to clarify this.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Conclusion
>>>> ----
>>>> The position of CFRG chair (or co-chair) is a role of crucial
>>>> importance to the IETF community.  The IETF is in desperate need of
>>>> trustworthy crypto guidance from parties who are above suspicion.  I
>>>> encourage the IAB and IRTF to replace Kevin Igoe with someone who can
>>>> provide this.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for considering this request.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Trevor
>>>
>>>
>