Re: [TLS] [T2TRG] ITDA - IoT Device Authentication

Hi, My apologies if I appeared a little aggressive in pursuing my incorrect idea. I have to learn a lot. Looking forward to your guidance in future also, Thanks and Regards, Sankalp Bagaria. On Mon 18 Feb, 2019, 1:51 PM Eliot Lear, wrote: > Just to add- this is what the plethora of BRSKI draft

Re: [TLS] [T2TRG] ITDA - IoT Device Authentication

Hi, Thank you for your insight. It will help me give direction to my work. I need to do my homework better. Will look from public/private pair angle instead of challenge/response. Looking forward to similar guidance in future also, Thanks and Regards, Sankalp Bagaria. On Mon 18 Feb, 2019, 10:44

Re: [TLS] [T2TRG] ITDA - IoT Device Authentication

Just to add- this is what the plethora of BRSKI drafts are attempting to address in 6tisch, ANIMA, and EMU. If there is to be a new mechanism, I encourage that it be listed on the GitHub page at https://github.com/iot-onboarding/catalog . Both the RE

Re: [TLS] [T2TRG] ITDA - IoT Device Authentication

Sankalp, The schema below is the wrong way to use PUF technology for IoT device authentication. PUF is already being used in many fielded IoT systems. You simply use the device unique PUF secret to create a public/private key pair. The public key is then extracted and used to authentic the de