Language for signer inheritance #377

deeglaze · 2025-02-12T05:27:05Z

With the proposed additions to CMW, this fixes Issue #358.

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

thomas-fossati · 2025-02-12T09:06:27Z

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

@@ -267,6 +267,8 @@ For more detail, see {{sec-corim-profile-types}}.
 A CoRIM can be signed ({{sec-corim-signed}}) using COSE Sign1 to provide end-to-end security to the CoRIM contents.
 When CoRIM is signed, the protected header carries further identifying information about the CoRIM signer.
 Alternatively, CoRIM can be encoded as a #6.501 CBOR-tagged payload ({{sec-corim-map}}) and transported over a secure channel.
+If a CoRIM is contained within a larger signed document or message, there MUST be a single signer assigned to the scope of the CoRIM as part of the document's specification or protocol conveying the message, respectively.
+For example, an application may use TLS to transmit an unsigned CoRIM and specify that the signer is the public key in the Hello message.


Worth adding CMW as another example.

I didn't want to make a circular citation since CMW references CoRIM.

No problem with that. These are "weak" links since the references are both informative.

yogeshbdeshpande · 2025-02-12T11:10:23Z

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

@@ -267,6 +267,8 @@ For more detail, see {{sec-corim-profile-types}}.
 A CoRIM can be signed ({{sec-corim-signed}}) using COSE Sign1 to provide end-to-end security to the CoRIM contents.
 When CoRIM is signed, the protected header carries further identifying information about the CoRIM signer.
 Alternatively, CoRIM can be encoded as a #6.501 CBOR-tagged payload ({{sec-corim-map}}) and transported over a secure channel.
+If a CoRIM is contained within a larger signed document or message, there MUST be a single signer assigned to the scope of the CoRIM as part of the document's specification or protocol conveying the message, respectively.


I would phrase the statement something like this.

`A CoRIM can be used without signature protection (please see unsigned-corim-map),

For example, an application may use TLS to transmit an unsigned CORIM and specify that the signer
is the public key in the Certificate Message.

Alternatively an unsigned CoRIM can be a part of a RATS Message which itself is signed (example a signed CMW).
In such cases the authority of CoRIM is delegated to the signer encapsulating the CoRIM.`

yogeshbdeshpande

Just realised PR #376, so modifying the review!

yogeshbdeshpande

suggested changes

yogeshbdeshpande · 2025-02-12T15:14:04Z

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

+If a CoRIM is contained within a larger signed document or message, there MUST be a single signer assigned to the scope of the CoRIM as part of the document's specification or protocol conveying the message, respectively.
+For example, an application may use TLS to transmit an unsigned CoRIM and specify that the signer is the public key in the Certificate message.


Suggested change

If a CoRIM is contained within a larger signed document or message, there MUST be a single signer assigned to the scope of the CoRIM as part of the document's specification or protocol conveying the message, respectively.

For example, an application may use TLS to transmit an unsigned CoRIM and specify that the signer is the public key in the Certificate message.

For example, an application may use TLS to transmit an unsigned CORIM and specify that the signer is the public key in the Certificate Message.

Alternatively an unsigned CoRIM can be a part of a RATS Message which itself is signed (example a signed CMW).

In such cases the authority of CoRIM is delegated to the signer encapsulating the CoRIM.

Yogesh please double-check this against the current status.

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

nedmsmith

The corim-meta-map information is not available unless the COSE_Sign1 is used. Hence, the signer role has to be added to corim-entity-map. This means we need a manifest-signer role defined.

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

nedmsmith · 2025-02-12T21:12:20Z

Push 5df10ee adds the manifest-signer role so that an unsigned-corim can contain the signer entity information when the COSE-Sign1-corim form of signing isn't available.

nedmsmith

See comments inline.

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

cddl/examples/cmw-corim-bundle.diag

With the proposed additions to CMW, this fixes Issue ietf-rats-wg#358.

Co-authored-by: Thomas Fossati <[email protected]>

Added manifest-signer role to the roles.

Added example that tests use of manifest-signer role in an unsigned-corim

Co-authored-by: Ned Smith <[email protected]>

Also change the TN() tagged data to the 2-ary array, as Laurence wants to remove that from the CMW spec.

Co-authored-by: Ned Smith <[email protected]>

nedmsmith

see comments

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

nedmsmith · 2025-02-24T23:07:58Z

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

+
+A method of signing a bundle of CoRIMs together is through a signed RATS Conceptual Message Wrapper (CMW) {{-cmw}}.
+The COSE_Sign1 signature format can be used with a CMW collection.
+The COSE protected header can include a CMW collection type name.


Suggested change

The COSE protected header can include a CMW collection type name.

The COSE protected header can include a Collection CMW type name.

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

nedmsmith · 2025-02-24T23:10:42Z

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

+The CMW MAY use any label for its CoRIMs.
+If there is a hierarchical structure to the CoRIM bundle, the base entry point SHOULD be labeled `0` in CBOR or `"base"` in JSON.
+It is RECOMMENDED to use to label a CoRIM with its tag-id in string format, where `uuid-type` string format is specified by [RFC4122].
+CoRIMs distributed in a bundle MAY declare their interdependence `dependent-rims` with local resource indicators.


Suggested change

CoRIMs distributed in a bundle MAY declare their interdependence `dependent-rims` with local resource indicators.

CoRIMs distributed in a bundle SHOULD declare their interdependence using `dependent-rims` with local resource indicators.

Why is this not SHOULD?

because it's redundant. The tags are in the values of the collection CMW's records, so you have TAG-ID => {TAG-ID, ...}

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

nedmsmith · 2025-02-24T23:19:55Z

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

+~~~
+
+The CMW MAY use any label for its CoRIMs.
+If there is a hierarchical structure to the CoRIM bundle, the base entry point SHOULD be labeled `0` in CBOR or `"base"` in JSON.


I'm confused, shouldn't the label be a UUID? I don't see how its used in the example.

If there's a root CoRIM, there's nothing pointing to it, and you need a notion of where to start drilling down in the graph.

Co-authored-by: Ned Smith <[email protected]>

deeglaze requested review from henkbirkholz, thomas-fossati, yogeshbdeshpande and nedmsmith as code owners February 12, 2025 05:27

thomas-fossati reviewed Feb 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

yogeshbdeshpande reviewed Feb 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

This comment was marked as duplicate.

Sign in to view

yogeshbdeshpande reviewed Feb 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

steven-bellock reviewed Feb 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

nedmsmith reviewed Feb 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

nedmsmith reviewed Feb 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

draft-ietf-rats-corim.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

thomas-fossati reviewed Feb 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

cddl/examples/cmw-corim-bundle.diag Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

cddl/examples/cmw-corim-bundle.diag Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

deeglaze and others added 15 commits February 24, 2025 14:38

Language for signer inheritance

f62898c

With the proposed additions to CMW, this fixes Issue ietf-rats-wg#358.

Fix TLS example.

bed87f9

Co-authored-by: Thomas Fossati <[email protected]>

Remove example and clarify context.

b587d81

Move signer assignment to its own section.

dbd8931

Update corim-role-type-choice.cddl

ee37479

Added manifest-signer role to the roles.

Create corim-roles.diag

f0d315d

Added example that tests use of manifest-signer role in an unsigned-corim

Update draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

2919a3d

Co-authored-by: Ned Smith <[email protected]>

Update draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

5cd41f9

Co-authored-by: Ned Smith <[email protected]>

Add CoRIM bundle CMW text and example.

8dfcae1

Change corim-meta "header" to "statement"

6edf3e3

Co-authored-by: Ned Smith <[email protected]>

Add CMW CDDL

02482b5

Also change the TN() tagged data to the 2-ary array, as Laurence wants to remove that from the CMW spec.

Use verbose cbor-record for CMW example.

2635d71

Ned's signer authority comment

bd6529d

Co-authored-by: Ned Smith <[email protected]>

Ensure manifest-signer is populated if not directly signed.

168be68

Co-authored-by: Ned Smith <[email protected]>

Bundle requirements.

4ff8922

Co-authored-by: Ned Smith <[email protected]>

deeglaze force-pushed the sig-inherit branch from a61e237 to 4ff8922 Compare February 24, 2025 22:38

nedmsmith reviewed Feb 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

deeglaze and others added 5 commits February 24, 2025 15:50

Update draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

769a283

Co-authored-by: Ned Smith <[email protected]>

Update draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

8916240

Co-authored-by: Ned Smith <[email protected]>

Update draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

ea8f9fe

Co-authored-by: Ned Smith <[email protected]>

Update draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

3b84431

Co-authored-by: Ned Smith <[email protected]>

Update draft-ietf-rats-corim.md

dbf7963

Co-authored-by: Ned Smith <[email protected]>

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Language for signer inheritance #377

Language for signer inheritance #377

deeglaze commented Feb 12, 2025

thomas-fossati Feb 12, 2025

deeglaze Feb 12, 2025

thomas-fossati Feb 12, 2025

yogeshbdeshpande Feb 12, 2025

This comment was marked as duplicate.

yogeshbdeshpande left a comment

yogeshbdeshpande left a comment

yogeshbdeshpande Feb 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading

deeglaze Feb 24, 2025

nedmsmith left a comment

nedmsmith commented Feb 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading

nedmsmith left a comment

nedmsmith left a comment

nedmsmith Feb 24, 2025

nedmsmith Feb 24, 2025

nedmsmith Feb 24, 2025

deeglaze Feb 24, 2025

nedmsmith Feb 24, 2025

deeglaze Feb 24, 2025

		If a CoRIM is contained within a larger signed document or message, there MUST be a single signer assigned to the scope of the CoRIM as part of the document's specification or protocol conveying the message, respectively.
		For example, an application may use TLS to transmit an unsigned CoRIM and specify that the signer is the public key in the Certificate message.

-If a CoRIM is contained within a larger signed document or message, there MUST be a single signer assigned to the scope of the CoRIM as part of the document's specification or protocol conveying the message, respectively.
-For example, an application may use TLS to transmit an unsigned CoRIM and specify that the signer is the public key in the Certificate message.
+For example, an application may use TLS to transmit an unsigned CORIM and specify that the signer is the public key in the Certificate Message.
+Alternatively an unsigned CoRIM can be a part of a RATS Message which itself is signed (example a signed CMW).
+In such cases the authority of CoRIM is delegated to the signer encapsulating the CoRIM.

	The COSE protected header can include a CMW collection type name.
	The COSE protected header can include a Collection CMW type name.

	CoRIMs distributed in a bundle MAY declare their interdependence `dependent-rims` with local resource indicators.
	CoRIMs distributed in a bundle SHOULD declare their interdependence using `dependent-rims` with local resource indicators.

Language for signer inheritance #377

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Language for signer inheritance #377

Conversation

deeglaze commented Feb 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

This comment was marked as duplicate.

yogeshbdeshpande left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

yogeshbdeshpande left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

yogeshbdeshpande Feb 12, 2025 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nedmsmith left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nedmsmith commented Feb 12, 2025 • edited Loading

nedmsmith left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nedmsmith left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

yogeshbdeshpande Feb 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading

nedmsmith commented Feb 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading