Practical Considerations and Implementation Experiences in Securing Smart Object Networks
draft-ietf-lwig-crypto-sensors-04

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (lwig WG)
Last updated 2017-11-12 (latest revision 2017-08-09)
Replaces draft-aks-lwig-crypto-sensors
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Informational
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Reviews
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Document shepherd Zhen Cao
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2017-09-28)
IESG IESG state AD Evaluation
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD Suresh Krishnan
Send notices to Zhen Cao <zhencao.ietf@gmail.com>
Light-Weight Implementation Guidance                            M. Sethi
Internet-Draft                                                  J. Arkko
Intended status: Informational                                A. Keranen
Expires: February 9, 2018                                       Ericsson
                                                                 H. Back
                                                                 Comptel
                                                          August 8, 2017

  Practical Considerations and Implementation Experiences in Securing
                         Smart Object Networks
                   draft-ietf-lwig-crypto-sensors-04

Abstract

   This memo describes challenges associated with securing resource-
   constrained smart object devices.  The memo describes a possible
   deployment model where resource-constrained devices sign message
   objects, discusses the availability of cryptographic libraries for
   small devices and presents some preliminary experiences with those
   libraries for message signing on small devices.  Lastly, the memo
   discusses trade-offs involving different types of security
   approaches.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on February 9, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents

Sethi, et al.           Expires February 9, 2018                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft      Smart Object Security Experiences        August 2017

   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Related Work  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Challenges  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Proposed Deployment Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Provisioning  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  Protocol Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  Code Availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   8.  Implementation Experiences  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   9.  Example Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   10. Design Trade-Offs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   11. Feasibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   12. Freshness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   13. Layering  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
   14. Symmetric vs. Asymmetric Crypto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  25
   15. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  25
   16. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  25
   17. Informative references  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
   Appendix A.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  31
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  31

1.  Introduction

   This memo describes challenges associated with securing smart object
   devices in constrained implementations and environments.  In
   Section 3 we specifically discuss three challenges: the
   implementation difficulties encountered on resource-constrained
   platforms, the problem of provisioning keys and making the choice of
   implementing security at the appropriate layer.

   Section 4 discusses a deployment model that the authors are
   considering for constrained environments.  The model requires minimal
   amount of configuration, and we believe it is a natural fit with the
   typical communication practices in smart object networking
Show full document text