Hi Meiling,
>> Problem: Certificate forgery issue
It’s not exactly about certificate forgery. It’s about issuing certificates to 
posture/trustworthiness-checked accessing devices, more like an authorization 
challenge. So maybe this answers Q1?

>> The certificate verifier verifies that the holder has the authority to use 
>> the certificate

The certificate verifier verifies the holder is eligible to have a certificate.

>> Reuse the remote proof process of RATS, Generate a attestation result for 
>> the certificate owner, and the certificate verifier can confirm the 
>> legitimacy of the certificate through the attestation result, Of course, 
>> this also involves the issue of mapping or reference.
Sorry for the confusion, I think it is not that intertwined — 1. use normal 
rats process to assess accessing devices, issue attestation results if it 
qualifies. 2. Verify AR using original rats procedures. 3. Issue certificate if 
2 pass. Does this answer your question?

Peter

From: Meiling Chen <chenmeil...@chinamobile.com>
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2024 10:41 AM
To: Liuchunchi(Peter) <liuchun...@huawei.com>; acme@ietf.org
Cc: acme-cha...@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Acme] new acme draft -- rats identifier and challenge

Hi Peter,
I have reviewed your draft, this draftis related to RATS, so I noticed it, I am 
trying to understand from these aspects:

  1.  Problem: Certificate forgery issue
  2.  Object: Short term certificate holders and verifier
  3.  Logic for problem-solving: The certificate verifier verifies that the 
holder has the authority to use the certificate
  4.  Solution: Reuse the remote proof process of RATS, Generate a attestation 
result for the certificate owner, and the certificate verifier can confirm the 
legitimacy of the certificate through the attestation result, Of course, this 
also involves the issue of mapping or reference.
I also have the following questions:

  1.  Does ACME pay attention to the issue of forged certificates?
  2.  Does the current coding implementation of ACME have a process for 
determining the authenticity of certificates?
Best,
Meiling

From: Liuchunchi(Peter)<mailto:liuchun...@huawei.com>
Date: 2024-10-23 15:22
To: acme@ietf.org<mailto:acme@ietf.org>
CC: acme-cha...@ietf.org<mailto:acme-cha...@ietf.org>
Subject: [Acme] new acme draft -- rats identifier and challenge
Hi folks,

Recently I submitted a new ACME draft that extends “rats” identifier and 
challenge type. The purpose of this work is to provide a means that allows an 
ACME server to test if an ACME client possess a valid remote attestation result 
(and an identifier to that), before issuing a certificate to it. Wonder if 
anyone may find this work interesting?

The draft is here https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liu-acme-rats/ and 
github repo is here https://github.com/liuchunchi/draft-liu-acme-rats, with 
some todos that welcomes contribution or comments.

Dear chairs, can I request a small slot in Dublin to share this work? 15 or 10 
minutes would suffice.

Best,
Peter (Chunchi) Liu

_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list -- acme@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to acme-le...@ietf.org

Reply via email to