A Model for Reputation Reporting
draft-ietf-repute-model-08

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (repute WG)
Last updated 2013-09-12 (latest revision 2013-08-27)
Replaces draft-kucherawy-reputation-model
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats plain text pdf html
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Consensus Unknown
Document shepherd dcrocker
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2013-05-25)
IESG IESG state IESG Evaluation::Revised I-D Needed
Telechat date
Needs a YES. Needs 2 more YES or NO OBJECTION positions to pass.
Responsible AD Pete Resnick
Send notices to repute-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-repute-model@tools.ietf.org
IANA IANA review state IANA OK - No Actions Needed
IANA action state None
REPUTE Working Group                                       N. Borenstein
Internet-Draft                                                  Mimecast
Intended status: Standards Track                            M. Kucherawy
Expires: February 28, 2014
                                                        A. Sullivan, Ed.
                                                               Dyn, Inc.
                                                         August 27, 2013

                    A Model for Reputation Reporting
                       draft-ietf-repute-model-08

Abstract

   This document describes a general architecture for a reputation-based
   service and a model for requesting reputation-related data over the
   Internet, where "reputation" refers to predictions or expectations
   about an entity or an identifier such as a domain name.  The document
   roughly follows the recommendations of RFC4101 for describing a
   protocol model.

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 28, 2014.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2013 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
   (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

Borenstein, et al.      Expires February 28, 2014               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft         Reputation Reporting Model            August 2013

   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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  High-Level Architecture  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   4.  Terminology and Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     4.1.  Response Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     4.2.  Reputon  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   5.  Information Represented in a Response Set  . . . . . . . . . .  8
   6.  Information Flow in the Reputation Query Protocol  . . . . . .  9
   7.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   8.  Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     8.1.  Data In Transit  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     8.2.  Aggregation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     8.3.  Collection Of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   9.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     9.1.  Biased Reputation Agents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     9.2.  Malformed Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     9.3.  Further Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   10. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   Appendix A.  Public Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Borenstein, et al.      Expires February 28, 2014               [Page 2]
Internet-Draft         Reputation Reporting Model            August 2013

1.  Introduction

   Historically, many Internet protocols have operated between
   unauthenticated entities.  For example, an email message's author
   field (From) [MAIL] can contain any display name or address and is
   not verified by the recipient or other agents along the delivery
   path.  Similarly, a sending email server using [SMTP] trusts that the
   [DNS] has led it to the intended receiving server.  Both kinds of
   trust are easily betrayed, opening the operation to subversion of
   some kind, which leads to spam, phishing, and other attacks.

   In recent years, explicit identity authentication mechanisms have
Show full document text