gmane.ietf.keyprov

Biggest Fake Conference in Computer Science

2013-04-27T17:45:16

Biggest Fake Conference in Computer Science


We are researchers from different parts of the world and conducted a study on  
the world’s biggest bogus computer science conference WORLDCOMP 
( http://sites.google.com/site/worlddump1 ) organized by Prof. Hamid Arabnia 
from University of Georgia, USA.


We submitted a fake paper to WORLDCOMP 2011 and again (the same paper 
with a modified title) to WORLDCOMP 2012. This paper had numerous 
fundamental mistakes. Sample statements from that paper include: 

(1). Binary logic is fuzzy logic and vice versa
(2). Pascal developed fuzzy logic
(3). Object oriented languages do not exhibit any polymorphism or inheritance
(4). TCP and IP are synonyms and are part of OSI model 
(5). Distributed systems deal with only one computer
(6). Laptop is an example for a super computer
(7). Operating system is an example for computer hardware


Also, our paper did not express any conceptual meaning.  However, it 
was accepted both the times without any modifications (and without

HOTP Errata & Implementations

Hannes Tschofenig — 2013-03-16T15:25:37

Hi all, 

in 2011 we published the TOTP with RFC 6238
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6238

TOTP normatively references HOTP (RFC 4226, see http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4226.txt). 

It turns out that HOTP has a few errata pending (see http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4226&rec_status=2&presentation=records). 

Is anyone in this group interested to discuss these errata issues with me?

It would also be interesting to hear what people had implemented. 

Please drop me a mail. 

Ciao
Hannes

2013: KEYPROV II

Anders Rundgren — 2013-01-02T20:24:02

http://webpki.org/papers/PKI/certenroll-features.pdf

It is currently in beta state for Android.  The specs are here:

   http://webpki.org/auth-token-4-the-cloud.html

Anders

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6030 (3369)

Sean Turner — 2012-11-29T17:14:31

List,

Do others have examples they are willing to share?

spt

On 11/28/12 3:30 PM, Simon Josefsson wrote:

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6030 (3418)

Sean Turner — 2012-11-29T15:25:19

Authors and List,

This seems right to me.  Objections?

spt

On 11/26/12 11:41 PM, RFC Errata System wrote:

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6030 (3369)

Simon Josefsson — 2012-11-28T20:30:02

I am also interested in learning how other implementations behave.

I understand you would want more implementer feedback before approving a
change like this.  The PSKC files I have seen all violate the MUST, but
I can't claim to have seen any representative proportion of all PSKC
files.  If people can share example PSKC files used in various
deployments, that would help.

The alternative to adopt this change is to update the examples
throughout the document to follow the MUST language.

/Simon

Sean Turner <turners-52zIA6KkH5U< at >public.gmane.org> writes:

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6030 (3369)

Sean Turner — 2012-11-27T23:34:04

I'm a little hesitant to make this change through an errata.  Two reasons:

1) This was the last discuss point to get resolved.  It was two SHOULDs 
before it became MUST oathman/iana.

2) It's changing 2119 language.

If there's really multiple implementations out there do it differently 
could we spin a simple paragraph draft that explains there's no reason 
to restrict it & the old/new text to get this fixed more formally?

Question: Do any of the other implementations fall over if you use 
something without a prefix?

spt


On 10/3/12 3:47 AM, RFC Errata System wrote:

[Technical Errata Reported] RFC6030 (3418)

RFC Errata System — 2012-11-27T04:41:25

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6030,
"Portable Symmetric Key Container (PSKC)".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6030&eid=3418

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Simon Josefsson <simon-RTwAkxXyIg6Ei8DpZVb4nw< at >public.gmane.org>

Section: 7 and 11

Original Text
-------------
Section 7:
       <Signature>

Section 11:
               <xs:element name="Signature"
                    type="ds:SignatureType" minOccurs="0"/>


Corrected Text
--------------
Section 7:
       <ds:Signature>

Section 11:
               <xs:element ref="ds:Signature" minOccurs="0"/>


Notes
-----
It seems the Signature element is in the wrong namespace, making PSKC incompatible with the XMLDsig specification.

There is a thread on this on the XMLSec mailing list:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.text.xml.xmlsec/4178

Both Aleksey Sanin (author of the XMLSec library) and G. Ken Holman (XML

Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6030 (3370)

Sean Turner — 2012-11-27T00:09:11

Any objections to marking this as accepted?  Seems right to me.

spt

On 10/3/12 4:04 PM, RFC Errata System wrote:

Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6030 (3364)

Sean Turner — 2012-11-27T00:08:29

Any objections to marking this as accepted?  Seems right to me.

spt

On 9/25/12 6:55 PM, RFC Errata System wrote:

Bug in PSKC XML schema wrt XMLDsig?

Simon Josefsson — 2012-10-16T08:07:14

All,

I have implemented support for XMLDsig protected PSKC and ran into an
issue with the XML Schema for PSKC.  It seems the Signature element is
in the wrong namespace, making it incompatible with the XMLDsig
specification.

There is a thread on this on the XMLSec mailing list:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.text.xml.xmlsec/4178

Both Aleksey Sanin (author of the XMLSec library) and G. Ken Holman (XML
expert) appear to believe this is an error in the schema:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.text.xml.xmlsec/4178/focus=4181
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.text.xml.xmlsec/4178/focus=4185

The fix appears to be simple, but before filing an RFC errata for this
I'd thought I should bring this up in case anyone wants to comment.

Section 7:

OLD:
       <Signature>
NEW:
       <ds:Signature>

OLD:
       </Signature>
NEW:
       </ds:Signature>

Section 11:

OLD:
               <xs:element name="Signature"
                    type="ds:SignatureType" minOccurs="0"/>

NEW:
               <xs:element ref="ds:Signature"

Free software PSKC implementation

Simon Josefsson — 2012-10-11T18:22:29

Hi all,

I wanted to let you know that I have just released a (partial) PSKC
implementation as free software in OATH Toolkit:

http://www.nongnu.org/oath-toolkit/

The tutorial is a good introduction to the functionality:

http://www.nongnu.org/oath-toolkit/libpskc-api/pskc-tutorial-pskctool.html
http://www.nongnu.org/oath-toolkit/libpskc-api/pskc-tutorial-quickstart.html

If anyone is interested in interop testing, please talk to me offlist.

/Simon

[Technical Errata Reported] RFC6030 (3369)

RFC Errata System — 2012-10-03T07:47:27

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6030,
"Portable Symmetric Key Container (PSKC)".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6030&eid=3369

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Simon Josefsson <simon-RTwAkxXyIg6Ei8DpZVb4nw< at >public.gmane.org>

Section: 4.3.1

Original Text
-------------
   <Manufacturer>:  This element indicates the manufacturer of the
      device.  Values for the <Manufacturer> element MUST be taken from
      either [OATHMAN] prefixes (i.e., the left column) or from the IANA
      Private Enterprise Number Registry [IANAPENREG], using the
      Organization value.  When the value is taken from [OATHMAN],
      "oath."  MUST be prepended to the value (e.g., "oath.<prefix value
      from [OATHMAN]>").  When the value is taken from [IANAPENREG],
      "iana."  MUST be prepended to the value (e.g., "iana.<Organization
      value from [IANAPENREG]>").


Corr

[Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6030 (3364)

RFC Errata System — 2012-09-25T22:55:23

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6030,
"Portable Symmetric Key Container (PSKC)".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6030&eid=3364

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Simon Josefsson <simon-RTwAkxXyIg6Ei8DpZVb4nw< at >public.gmane.org>

Section: 3

Original Text
-------------
      ----------------        ----------------
      | KeyPackage   |    0..1| DeviceInfo   |
      |--------------|--------|--------------|
      |              |--      | SerialNumber |
      ----------------  |     | Manufacturer |
              |         |     | ....         |
              |         |     ----------------
 

Corrected Text
--------------
      ----------------        ----------------
      | KeyPackage   |    0..1| DeviceInfo   |
      |--------------|--------|--------------|
      |              |--      | SerialNo     |
      ----------------  |     | Manufacturer |

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6063 (2948)

Magnus Nystrom — 2011-11-13T18:09:03

Agreed.

Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6063 (2999)

Magnus Nystrom — 2011-11-13T18:06:24

Gareth appears to be correct; the text in 4.2.4 should probably also be amended to state something like:
"The AD element MUST be sent unless it was already sent in the KeyProvClientHello message."

Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6063 (2999)

Sean Turner — 2011-11-13T23:31:05

Okay, I can amend the errata to include this.

spt

On 11/14/11 2:06 AM, Magnus Nystrom wrote:

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6063 (2948)

2011-11-13T19:13:47

Agreed.

----- Original Message -----
From: Magnus Nystrom [mailto:mnystrom-0li6OtcxBFHby3iVrkZq2A< at >public.gmane.org]
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2011 01:09 PM
To: Sean Turner <turners-52zIA6KkH5U< at >public.gmane.org>; Doherty, Andrea; mpei-0nFLJxsdniVWk0Htik3J/w< at >public.gmane.org <mpei-0nFLJxsdniVWk0Htik3J/w< at >public.gmane.org>; smachani-+/OggRDFqlVt1OO0OYaSVA< at >public.gmane.org <smachani-+/OggRDFqlVt1OO0OYaSVA< at >public.gmane.org>
Cc: stephen.farrell-aVqd/T0vMsmzQB+pC5nmwQ< at >public.gmane.org <stephen.farrell-aVqd/T0vMsmzQB+pC5nmwQ< at >public.gmane.org>; phill-Ne4VK2OdGm2OFMEK3gwZYA< at >public.gmane.org <phill-Ne4VK2OdGm2OFMEK3gwZYA< at >public.gmane.org>; Hannes.Tschofenig-hi6Y0CQ0nG0< at >public.gmane.org <Hannes.Tschofenig-hi6Y0CQ0nG0< at >public.gmane.org>; keyprov-EgrivxUAwEY< at >public.gmane.org <keyprov-EgrivxUAwEY< at >public.gmane.org>
Subject: RE: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6063 (2948)

Agreed.

Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6063 (2948)

Sean Turner — 2011-11-13T02:14:36

I think this is right, but wanted to confirm with you.

spt

On 8/28/11 11:25 PM, RFC Errata System wrote:

Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6063 (2999)

Sean Turner — 2011-11-13T02:13:43

Trying to clear up the errata.  Should I approve this?

spt

On 10/18/11 12:39 AM, RFC Errata System wrote:

[Editorial Errata Reported] RFC6063 (2999)

RFC Errata System — 2011-10-17T16:39:26

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6063,
"Dynamic Symmetric Key Provisioning Protocol (DSKPP)".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6063&eid=2999

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Gareth Richards <gareth.richards-1ip3tSrymgM< at >public.gmane.org>

Section: 4.2.4

Original Text
-------------
           DSKPP Client                         DSKPP Server
           ------------                         ------------
           E(K,R_C), AD          --->


Corrected Text
--------------
           DSKPP Client                         DSKPP Server
           ------------                         ------------
           E(K,R_C), [AD]          --->


Notes
-----
The AD is carried in the <KeyProvClientHello> if sent as a result of a trigger and so is optional in the <ekyProvClientNonce>.

Instructions:
-------------
This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, ple