Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CA Certs request does not seem to fit BRSKI or PRM #23

Closed
mcr opened this issue Sep 19, 2022 · 2 comments
Closed

CA Certs request does not seem to fit BRSKI or PRM #23

mcr opened this issue Sep 19, 2022 · 2 comments

Comments

@mcr
Copy link
Member

mcr commented Sep 19, 2022

In section 4.2, figure 3, the time sequence diagram has the steps 1,2, which does not fit into the BRSKI RFC8995 flow,
nor does it seem to fit into the PRM model of communications.
Specifically, the CA Certs Request/reply occurs after enrollment, I think, but I guess it just occurs after voucher response.
The Attribute Request/Response is I guess the same as the /csrattrs request.
The Certificate Confirm step seems fine.
Mostly, I am concerned that this is not synchronized with PRM's needs.

@DDvO
Copy link
Collaborator

DDvO commented Sep 20, 2022

I do not see a problem here in comparison with BRSKI, while I do not know for BRSKI-PRM.

Figure 3 just extends/generalizes the final (enrollment) step of BRSKI.

RFC 8995, Section 5.9: EST Integration for PKI Bootstrapping says:

The pledge SHOULD follow the BRSKI operations with EST enrollment operations including "CA Certificates Request", "CSR Attributes Request", and "Client Certificate Request" or "Server-Side Key Generation", etc.

This is also done with BRSKI-AE, in a fashion that is independent of EST but essentially with the same abstract contents
(where part of these, namely /cacers, and /csrattrs are optional, like in EST).

BTW, note that the optional certificate confirmation mentioned in Figure 3 is not available in EST, but in CMP,
and this type of confirmation is specific to the enrollment step and independent of the final BRSKI-side Enrollment Status Telemetry, as described in RFC 8995, Section 5.9.4: Enrollment Status Telemetry.
Maybe this subtle difference should be pointed out.

DDvO added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 23, 2022
…sue #23

Also update the changelog, tweak the aasvg input, and other minor improvement.
@DDvO
Copy link
Collaborator

DDvO commented Nov 28, 2023

Hi @mcr, we just noticed this rather dated open issue.
Can it be closed meanwhile? If so, I'd ask you to do that.

@mcr mcr closed this as completed Nov 29, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants