OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

security-services message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: [security-services] Metadata for 1.1 Web Browser SSO Profile, Draft 06, 1 May 2003


Jahan - I would like to encourage debate of a standard technique for
validating metadata exchanged over an untrusted channel.  As an initial
step, could you add the following description as an appendix to the metadata
draft?  I hope this will spark an informed and valuable debate on the list
and/or in subsequent teleconferences.  Thanks a lot.  All the best.  Tim.


Out-of-band validation

Introduction

In the case that the metadata is not communicated between the source and
destination over an authentic channel, the destination's copy of the
metadata is not trustworthy.  Yet, the trustworthiness of all subsequent
communications between the source and destination depends upon the
trustworthiness of the metadata.  Therefore, a technique is required to
validate the destination's copy of the metadata.

Metadata validation MUST be performed using an alternative authentic
channel, such as a telephone call or facsimile transmission, company
letterhead, business card or face-to-face exchange.  In order to minimize
the cost of communicating and validating metadata, it MUST be possible to
validate metadata verbally and reliably in a telephone call.

Procedure

The following procedure is RECOMMENDED.

1.	The source SHALL calculate a validation string for the metadata
according to the procedure described below.
2.	The source SHALL communicate the validation string over an authentic
channel to the destination.
3.	The source SHALL communicate the metadata over an untrusted channel
to the destination.
4.	The destination SHALL calculate the validation string for the
received metadata according to the procedure described below.
5.	If the validation string calculated by the destination is identical
to the validation string received from the source, then the destination MAY
install and rely upon the metadata, otherwise it MUST NOT rely on the
metadata.

Validation string calculation

The validation string SHALL be calculated from the binary form of the
authority's self-signed certificate by operating upon it with the SHA-1 hash
algorithm.  The right-most 4 bytes of the resulting digest are discarded.
The left-most 3 bits of each of the remaining 16 bytes are discarded.  The
remaining sixteen 5-bit values are represented as alphanumeric characters
according to the following table.

00000 > A
00001 > B
... omitting I
11000 > Z
11001 > 3
11010 > 4
...
11111 > 9

Finally, the alphanumeric string is divided into four sub-strings, each of
four characters, and the sub-strings are separated by hyphens.  For example:

A4HY-8KLN-9T3M-7GK4

Note that hyphens are inserted to assist in dictation.  Note also that the
ambiguities between I and 1, O and 0 and Z and 2 are eliminated.  Also, note
that the ambiguity between upper and lower-case letters is eliminated.






-----Original Message-----
From: Jahan Moreh [mailto:jmoreh@sigaba.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 11:16 AM
To: Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com; tim.moses@entrust.com; cantor.2@osu.edu;
security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [security-services] Metadata for 1.1 Web Browser SSO
Profile, Draft 06, 1 May 2003


Fredrick -

I think the correct and accurate language is:
"That is, the public key in the metadata document, as described in Section
2.1.5.5 SHOULD only be used for verifying assertions, requests, and
responses."
Thanks,
Jahan


----------------
Jahan Moreh
Chief Security Architect
310.286.3070

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com [mailto:Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 7:22 AM
> To: tim.moses@entrust.com; jmoreh@sigaba.com; cantor.2@osu.edu;
> security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [security-services] Metadata for 1.1 Web Browser SSO
> Profile, Draft 06, 1 May 2003
>
>
> Shouldn't it say at line [279] private key instead of public?
>
> "That is, the  private key corresponding to the public key in the
> metadata document,
> as described in Section 2.1.5.5 SHOULD only be used for signing
> assertions, requests, and responses."
>
>
>
> regards, Frederick
>
> Frederick Hirsch
> Nokia Mobile Phones
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ext Tim Moses [mailto:tim.moses@entrust.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 4:14 PM
> > To: 'jmoreh@sigaba.com'; Tim Moses; 'Scott Cantor';
> > security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: RE: [security-services] Metadata for 1.1 Web Browser SSO
> > Profile, Draft 06, 1 May 2003
> >
> >
> > Jahan - I am thinking of lines 277-281.  From a quick glance,
> > I don't see
> > any other reference to this topic.  All the best. Tim.
> >
> > PS.  Also look on lines 103, 138 and 164 for typos.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jahan Moreh [mailto:jmoreh@sigaba.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 3:36 PM
> > To: Tim Moses; 'Scott Cantor'; security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: RE: [security-services] Metadata for 1.1 Web Browser SSO
> > Profile, Draft 06, 1 May 2003
> >
> >
> > I'll look at the language of this draft and make the
> > necessary corrections
> > once we all agree (it seems that we do).
> >
> > Tim - can you point to specific line numbers in draft 06?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jahan
> >
> > ----------------
> > Jahan Moreh
> > Chief Security Architect
> > 310.286.3070
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Tim Moses [mailto:tim.moses@entrust.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 12:28 PM
> > > To: 'Scott Cantor'; Tim Moses;
> > security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > Subject: RE: [security-services] Metadata for 1.1 Web Browser SSO
> > > Profile, Draft 06, 1 May 2003
> > >
> > >
> > > Scott - We agree. The current draft makes it mandatory to
> > use a different
> > > key.  I am arguing that the same key should be permitted.
> > >
> > > I am also arguing that a non-keyed digest procedure that results
> > > in a string
> > > that can be unambiguously recited over the telephone is
> > called for.  This
> > > means that it should have only upper-case letters and numbers, be
> > > separated
> > > into chunks of 3 or 4 characters (like a North American phone
> > > number) and be
> > > no longer than (say) 16 characters.
> > >
> > > All the best.  Tim.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Scott Cantor [mailto:cantor.2@osu.edu]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 11:20 AM
> > > To: 'Tim Moses'; security-services@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > Subject: RE: [security-services] Metadata for 1.1 Web Browser SSO
> > > Profile, Draft 06, 1 May 2003
> > >
> > >
> > > > In the case where the key distributed with the metadata is a
> > > > public signature-verification key, it is acceptable,
> > > > desirable and conventional to sign the metadata using the
> > > > corresponding private key.  This is common practice for X.509
> > > > certificates.  In addition, it allows the integrity of the
> > > > metadata to be confirmed using an out-of-band "digest".
> > >
> > > It shouldn't be mandatory to use the same key, since that
> > basically only
> > > permits point to point trust.
> > >
> > > > As currently required, the integrity of the metadata has to
> > > > be protected with a separate key.  Presumably, it too has
> > > > associated metadata that has to be distributed, protected
> > > > with another key, which (in-turn) has metadata. Allowing the
> > > > enclosed key to confirm the integrity of the metadata, breaks
> > > > this cycle.
> > >
> > > PKI always has an arbitrary stopping point somewhere. It's ok to
> > > allow it to
> > > be self-signed, but we shouldn't insist on it.
> > >
> > > > Here is a suggestion for a digest procedure:
> > >
> > > Umm, why not XML signature?
> > >
> > > -- Scott
> > >
> > > You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting
> > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/security-services
> /members/leave
> _workgroup.php
>
> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/security-services/mem
bers/leave_workgroup.php


You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/security-services/members/leave
_workgroup.php


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]