Re: [Cfrg] Re: [saag] Algorithm upgrades

[James Hughes <James_Hughes at StorageTek.com>]

On Nov 1, 2004, at 8:09 PM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:

> > 1. _New_ protocols that are being design should include the ability 
> > to negotiate algorithms. This is just good hygiene. If this is not 
> > formalized, it should be.
>
> I strongly disagree. History has showed that negotiation mechanisms 
> can lead
>  to worse security problems than they are meant to address. The IETF 
> has
>  certainly showed an exceptional ability to overcomplicate them.

Well. We disagree then.

The only history of negotiation failures that I have seen is the GSM 
vulnerability where they put ECC under weak encryption and then used 
that same key for high strength, cracked the key, spoofed a base 
station, mounted a MIM attack and got in. Yes this is a protocol 
vulnerability with 2 (Doh!) stupid crypto mistakes. Was this caused 
because there was algorithm flexibility or because of other reasons? I 
would suggest that this is more about the other mistakes than about the 
fact that there were protocol vulnerabilities. If you have other 
examples, I'm all ears.

Keeping a protocol centered on the problem without the siren call of  
"feature creep" is not easy. It is this creep of "just one more feature 
cuz its a simple tweak" that, when compounded created a 
incomprehensible stew of incongruous kludges. If one can keep their eye 
on the ball, and is managed as a fundamental feature ( not an add on ) 
along with scalability and reliability, then it -is- possible to have 
algorithm flexibility.

Half of the IETF protocols are more complicated than the average IETF 
protocol.

Well, maybe we strongly agree. What we need is an ability to add new 
algorithms, remove bad algorithms with causing undue complexity to the 
user.



> What we need is a policy layer for the whole application protocol layer
>  stack. It should not be part of the individual protocols, it should 
> be part
> of the DNS.

This seems like a policy punt. what are you suggesting and why?

Thanks

jim


_______________________________________________
Cfrg mailing list
Cfrg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg