On Friday, 19 March 2021 15:12:25 CET, Eliot Lear (elear) wrote:
On 19 Mar 2021, at 12:20, Hubert Kario <hka...@redhat.com> wrote:

it's also a place that needs to keep on moving forward as new attacks and
more powerful computers come into light every year
Sure.  That’s why I support the draft.

which nothing short of
MUST NOT seems to get across.
Why would you think that in this case?  The IEEE has been 
remarkably good at tracking our work, as have a  great many 
other organizations, but for uses you’ve never considered.  
That’s why code like OpenSSL is deployed in places you’ve 
never heard of.  And while you’re right, we’re not the 
protocol police, it’s bad when we give developers advice they 
simply cannot follow because they live in the real world.
they also need to accept the reality that their use-case is a niche use
case for the whole ecosystem, so not all things will align nicely and not
all advice will be applicable to them
Is it?  There are hundreds of millions of devices that cover 
this use case, and that number is accelerating.
and how it's a good thing that the number of devices that can't have their
software updated is accelerating?

so maybe, we should give them a little bit of credit and 
assume that they are
able to differentiate stuff that makes sense in their context from stuff
that's applicable to the web in general
And herein lies the problem: either this document is intended 
for the “web” or it is intended to be general.  The two are not 
the same.  I like scoping this document broadly, though, to mark 
what is currently a best practice.  And THEN you can give those 
people credit for doing the right thing, because they largely 
have in the past.
To be clear: this is a bit of a juggernaut.  The idea that a 
device identity survives through the entire lifetime of a device 
very much depends on what that lifetime is.  Toys and IT 
equipment have 3-5 year lifetimes.  Some sensors have six week 
lifetimes.  Some stuff in the ground has 40-50 year lifetimes, 
and some mechanical tools like presses have 120 year lifetimes.
So sure.  802.1AR is going to need to evolve around these 
concepts.  But let’s please just recognize the reality we face, 
that the currently deployed systems are going to be around for 
quite a while, they will continue to verify as they do, and 
their certs won’t change, at least for onboarding purposes.
the whole point of it is to say: this is how you this TLS stuff,
if you don't do it like this, you really should have a good excuse

but it's not IETF job to find those excuses, and it's not IETF job to
ensure that you're able to use IETF protocols, unchanged, for 50
years

now, just because you have an excuse, doesn't mean you don't have a
liability, just like the people that run lathes or presses using
Windows 95 PCs
--
Regards,
Hubert Kario
Senior Quality Engineer, QE BaseOS Security team
Web: www.cz.redhat.com
Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkyňova 115, 612 00  Brno, Czech Republic

_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list
Uta@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta

Reply via email to