Hi David,

Interesting idea. Seems like a radical, hard change but I want to understand it 
better. Some clarifications:

- Previously, in the ICA suppression draft you had correctly brought up the 
challenge of keeping an up-to-date ICA cache while most browsers are not up to 
date. The Merkle tree mechanism requires constant updates. Would that be even 
more of challenge with browsers that have not been updated?

- To make this work for WebPKI, would the Transparency Service need to fetch 
from all WebPKI issuing CAs and update them every hour?

- CAs would also need to publish their Merkle tree logs similarly to CT, right?

- Negotiating a new CertType would be a fingerprint as you say in Section 12. 
The size in the response is also a fingerprint for the Subscriber. It is not a 
huge concern for me personally especially if this got wide adoption, but it was 
brought up before in similar contexts.

- To me this draft eliminates the need for a PKI and basically makes the 
structure flat. Each CA issues certs in the form of a batched tree. Relying 
parties that “trust and are aware” of this issuing CA’s tree can verify the 
signed window structure and then trust it. So in a TLS handshake we would have 
(1 subscriber public key + 2 signatures + some relatively small tree structure) 
compared to (1 signature + (3 sigs + 1 public key) for server cert + (1 Sig + 1 
Public key) per ICA cert in the chain). If we borrowed the same flat PKI logic 
though and started “trusting” on a per issuer CA basis then the comparison 
becomes (1 public key + 2 signatures + some small tree structure) vs (1 public 
key + 4 sigs). So we are saving 2 PQ sig minus the small tree structure size . 
Am I misunderstanding the premise here?



From: TLS <tls-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of David Benjamin
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 5:09 PM
To: <tls@ietf.org> <tls@ietf.org>
Cc: Devon O'Brien <asymmet...@google.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [TLS] Merkle Tree Certificates


CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the 
content is safe.


Hi all,

I've just uploaded a draft, below, describing several ideas we've been mulling 
over regarding certificates in TLS. This is a draft-00 with a lot of moving 
parts, so think of it as the first pass at some of ideas that we think fit well 
together, rather than a concrete, fully-baked system.

The document describes a new certificate format based on Merkle Trees, which 
aims to mitigate the many signatures we send today, particularly in 
applications that use Certificate Transparency, and as post-quantum signature 
schemes get large. Four signatures (two SCTs, two X.509 signatures) and an 
intermediate CA's public key gets rather large, particularly with something 
like Dilithium3's 3,293-byte signatures. This format uses a single Merkle Tree 
inclusion proof, which we estimate at roughly 600 bytes. (Note that this 
proposal targets certificate-related signatures but not the TLS handshake 
signature.)

As part of this, it also includes an extensibility and certificate negotiation 
story that we hope will be useful beyond this particular scheme.

This isn't meant to replace existing PKI mechanisms. Rather, it's an optional 
optimization for connections that are able to use it. Where they aren't, you 
negotiate another certificate. I work on a web browser, so this has browsers 
and HTTPS over TLS in mind, but we hope it, or some ideas in it, will be more 
broadly useful.

That said, we don't expect it's for everyone, and that's fine! With a robust 
negotiation story, we don't have to limit ourselves to a single answer for all 
cases at once. Even within browsers and the web, it cannot handle all cases, so 
we're thinking of this as one of several sorts of PKI mechanisms that might be 
selected via negotiation.

Thoughts? We're very eager to get feedback on this.

David

On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 4:38 PM 
<internet-dra...@ietf.org<mailto:internet-dra...@ietf.org>> wrote:

A new version of I-D, draft-davidben-tls-merkle-tree-certs-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by David Benjamin and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:           draft-davidben-tls-merkle-tree-certs
Revision:       00
Title:          Merkle Tree Certificates for TLS
Document date:  2023-03-10
Group:          Individual Submission
Pages:          45
URL:            
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-davidben-tls-merkle-tree-certs-00.txt
Status:         
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-davidben-tls-merkle-tree-certs/
Html:           
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-davidben-tls-merkle-tree-certs-00.html
Htmlized:       
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-davidben-tls-merkle-tree-certs


Abstract:
   This document describes Merkle Tree certificates, a new certificate
   type for use with TLS.  A relying party that regularly fetches
   information from a transparency service can use this certificate type
   as a size optimization over more conventional mechanisms with post-
   quantum signatures.  Merkle Tree certificates integrate the roles of
   X.509 and Certificate Transparency, achieving comparable security
   properties with a smaller message size, at the cost of more limited
   applicability.




The IETF Secretariat

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

Reply via email to