-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
Meetingminutes Minutes24012018
Bob Relyea edited this page Mar 4, 2025
·
1 revision
- Roll call (Valerie) - quorum achieved.
- Roll call
- Review / approval of the agenda
- Review of previous meeting minutes (January 10, 2018)
- V3.0 Items (Other business to be covered in the following meetings)
- Additional ECC Key Types Ballot
- Review Spec V3 from Chris Z
- Review Mechanisms V3 form Chris Z
- Planning for review/complete
- Proposal - Salsa20 & CHaCHa20 - Stef M
- Proposal - Blake2b - Stef M
- Proposal - X3DH & DoubleRatchet - Stef M
- Proposal - XEDDSA signateur mechanism - Stef M
- Comment on comments list (Girish Kumar, CKA_TRUSTED). (Tony C) (https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/pkcs11-comment/201709/msg00000.html)
- Comments list query (Timo Teras, ETSI TS 103 097 certificates)
- Letter to NIST regarding AES GCM IV generation (Tony)
- PKCS#11 Repository (Tony C)
- PKCS#11 F2F Meeting (April 2018)
- New business
- Set next meeting date
- Call for late arrivals
- Adjourn
- Gerry moved, Justin seconded. No objections, comments or abstentions. Agenda approved.
- January 10, 2018
- Tim moved. Justin seconded. No objections, comments or abstentions. Minutes approved.
Chris and Bob will still have some additional discussions. Daniel was looking for one new item he could not find in the specification.
- approved.
- Chris and Bob will still have some additional discussions. Daniel was looking for one new item he could not find in the specification. Chris will go and look to make sure it's there.
- Tony notes we should look at the updates based on the ballot.
- Tony: Seems we won't be able to close off by end of January. Anyone still working on a more detailed review?
- Valerie: Would still like to take a pass. Bob R. would like to look after next round of edits.
- Valerie: Chris is still waiting for placement guidance from Tony Cox and Darren Johnson before he can incorporate their approved changes.
- Valerie: when will we be publishing the header files for the review? Tony has approvals, hopes to publish next week.
- Valerie noted to please update the column: "Content reviewed by whom during committee review/Date" if you have done a thorough review of that proposals addition to the spec.
- Tony asked where to find which items Chris Z is still looking for guidance on, it is if "Added to Which Document by Editor(s)" is still blank, it hasn't been added and Chris has asked for guidance on how/where to add.
- Stef: not sure if the proposal for AEAD is sufficient or not. Wonders why ChaCha/Poly didn't have the AEAD originally.
- Bob: we didn't have it, then we noticed it was missing. Chris asked if we should create AEAD, but we didn't have a good way of doing it until we got the AEAD proposal in 3.0. Bob hasn't had a chance to review the new spec, yet. still outstanding.
- Stef: The automic versions of ChaCha/Poly are truly automic, you can do this with blocks in the stream. When you do it in AEAD context, you need a context of message metaphor. I left it out, because it's at a higher level (based on question from Daniel) Bob would like to see that explanation added to the proposal to thwart future question. It's obvious if you know the RFC well, but may still be helpful.
- Stef: some tables are not complete, but covered that in email and mailing list.
- Bob wants more time to review new AEAD versions before moving forward.
- Concerns about where we are in the standardization process for Blake2b, XEDDSA and X3DH.
- Bob: It's not standardized in the industry, but has been standardized int he industry. We aren't in the business of standardizing the protocol or cryptography, but putting it into PKCS#11. We are pretty open about setting PKCS#11 standard if protocols are stable. If we don't standardize on it, then people will use a vendor defined mechanism - then it's not standard. Would like to err on the side of working on an actual mechanism, before it ends up as a vendor mechanism. Vendor mechanisms should be more experimental or vendor specific.
- Stef: I specified to it to make it interoperable with the big vendors out there now, so we can interact with all of those implementations out there. Used by Google, MS, Facebook, and WhatsApp. It's a defacto standard. Stef talked to author of signal about these other implementations to see how much they vary, he will close the loop with that author to make sure we're in line with other vendors.
- Daniel: I See there is adoption, but worry about modifications to the protocol. PDF was only published in 2016. Cautious there still may be changes.
- Stef: That may be the case, but if we put in versioning, we should be okay.
- Bob/Daniel: If they do an update, we'd have to get a new mechanism anyways.
- Bob: It is deployed, showing persistence in the world. It is a good question and happy to have had the discussion
- Stef will contact Trevor, but no other major work here.
- Tony: no objections to moving forward, just need a few more clarifications. (applies to Blake2b, XEDDSA and X3DH)
- Stef: For Blake2b, there is no further information to provide, that protocol is set in stone. Can have more clarifications on XEDDSA and X3DH.
- Daniel: I think we can move forward with Blake2b, because there is an RFC for that.
- Tim moves to take Blake2b motion to ballot. Daniel seconds. No objections, abstentions or comments. Motion to open a ballot is approved.
- Valerie noted we should get those identifiers, so we all know what we're voting for. Motion ammended:
- Tim moves to take Blake2b motion to ballot after Bob or Tony provide Stef with the identifier. Daniel seconds again. No objections, abstentions or comments. Motion to open a ballot is approved.
- Bob will help Tony generate the identifiers.
- see above discussion, Stef will do clarifications.
- see above discussion, Stef will do clarifications.
Comment on comments list (Girish Kumar, CKA_TRUSTED). (Tony) (https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/pkcs11-comment/201709/msg00000.html)
- Tony has not made progress here.
- Has anyone had a chance to look at this? Any volunteers?
- Tony will be meeting with TC Admin next week on this.
- Tony has approvals, hopes to roll out the new repo next week.
- RSA kicks off on Monday, April 16. We normally meet the week before, coordinated with KMIP. KMIP would be 2 days.
- Valerie suggested a straw poll, no motion necessary.
- Location is somewhere in the bay area, depending on where we can find a host - for around 20 people.
- Benton will look into hosting it at Cisco.
- Straw poll or have people come back with their dates? Bob recommends options are few enough to just open a straw poll, which is a forcing function for people to look at their calendars.
- none
- 7 February 2017.
- Bruce Rich, Jeff.
- Greg moved. Tim seconded. No objections, comments or abstentions. Adjourned.