[Nsi-wg] [voms-proc-wg] OGF NSI networking architecture and need for certificates with restricted user base

[Mischa Salle]

Hi Alan,

I think he's mixing authentication and authorization. If I look at 
page 10, my reaction is, there is nothing wrong in trusting that client
cert #2 is client cert #2, that's only the authentication part. That
doesn't mean you also *allow* client cert #2. Same on page 11, trusting
a certificate there should mean trusting that the identity is what it
claims to be. Doesn't mean allowing it to enter.
If this is indeed his whole use-case, I would say, go for (a subset of)
public CAs and restrict access based on specific DNs. That gives you
still all the revocation and renewal possibilities while at the same
time allowing for restricted access.
A private CA could work, but is a lot of work, and not trivial to keep
safe... Self-signed certificates will not scale. They give no way of
revocation, big problems with expiry etc.
If they need more advanced authZ, such as based on certain roles, than
indeed VOMS attribute certificates might be useful, although that would
mean software adaptations.

    Best wishes,
    Mischa Sallé

On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 03:34:08PM +0000, Sill, Alan wrote:
> Dear folks in the OGF CAOPS, VOMS-PROC and NSI working groups.
> 
> I'd like to initiate some discussion among the participants in these
> working groups for the use case referred to in the talk at the link
> below.
> 
> Some review of the conditions for this use case would be helpful. Note
> this is also a use case that comes up in Internet-of-Things
> discussions, and has caused some discussion on the PKIX group list
> (though that group is now dormant of course) and other related lists
> lately.
> 
> To me this is a familiar situation with well-known parameters, but
> possibly some additional considerations, and might possibly lead to
> some useful communication among the members in these groups about
> solutions that could be applied using existing technologies that would
> avoid the possible downsides associated with the proposed use of
> self-signed certificates. (For example, extended attribute
> certificates as used in VOMS, though the same or perhaps through a
> different implementation, might be a good solution here; other
> solutions might be contemplated that would be more attractive than
> self-signed certificates for this situation.)
> 
> Your comments, discussion and input are recruited (by me -- I'm not
> speaking for the NIS-WG members per se!), and I hope that all parties
> will regard this as useful discussion for information exchange only.
> 
> Thanks,
> Alan
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: Guy Roberts <Guy.Roberts at dante.net<mailto:Guy.Roberts at dante.net>>
> Subject: RE: [Nsi-wg] Wednesday's NSI conf call
> Date: July 30, 2014 at 1:30:19 PM GMT+2
> To: Alan Sill <kilohoku150 at gmail.com<mailto:kilohoku150 at gmail.com>>
> 
> Hi Alan,
> 
> Please find the slides on NSI security here:
> 
> https://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf/nsi-wg?folder_id=6592
> 
> The proposal is that  NSAs will run their own private Certificate Authorities (self-signing) rather than using public Certificate Authorities.  Participating NSAs will then exchange information about  each other’s Certificates in an ad hoc way.
> 
> This solution does not scale well as private Certificates have to be manually shared, but it reduces the size of the certificate pool.
> 
> Guy
> 
> From: Alan Sill [mailto:kilohoku150 at gmail.com]
> Sent: 30 July 2014 10:56
> To: Guy Roberts
> Cc: Alan Sill
> Subject: Re: [Nsi-wg] Wednesday's NSI conf call
> 
> Guy,
> 
> On Jul 30, 2014, at 11:02 AM, Guy Roberts <Guy.Roberts at dante.net<mailto:Guy.Roberts at dante.net>> wrote:
> 
> - comments/feedback from last week’s presentation from John on ‘Secure Communications with Self Signed Certificates’
> 
> Are copies of these slides available? I would like to understand the context.
> 
> (In general, use of self-signed certificates is risky at best, so I would like to understand the use case here.)
> 
> Alan
> 

> _______________________________________________
> voms-proc-wg mailing list
> voms-proc-wg at ogf.org
> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/voms-proc-wg


-- 
Nikhef                      Room  H155
Science Park 105            Tel.  +31-20-592 5102
1098 XG Amsterdam           Fax   +31-20-592 5155
The Netherlands             Email msalle at nikhef.nl
  __ .. ... _._. .... ._  ... ._ ._.. ._.. .._..
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 4332 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/nsi-wg/attachments/20140731/977efcc5/attachment.bin>