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 |
|
2017-08-11
(latest revision 2017-08-09)
|
|
Replaces |
|
draft-aks-lwig-crypto-sensors
|
|
Stream |
|
IETF
|
|
Intended RFC status |
|
(None)
|
|
Formats |
|
plain text
xml
pdf
html
bibtex
|
| Stream |
WG state
|
|
WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up
Doc Shepherd Follow-up Underway
|
|
Document shepherd |
|
No shepherd assigned
|
| IESG |
IESG state |
|
I-D Exists
|
|
Consensus Boilerplate |
|
Unknown
|
|
Telechat date |
|
|
|
Responsible AD |
|
(None)
|
|
Send notices to |
|
(None)
|
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