Hema, On 2011-09-14 11:52, Hema Krishnamurthy wrote: > 1. There is mention of MLS in the list below, but have you considered > "containers" for each security level in an MLS system?
On 2011-09-14 12:23, John Davidson wrote: > IMHO, the answer to 1. is "not really," because to address this in a sound way > excludes a lot of unsound things that legacy systems are accustomed to doing; > and expect of CICM. On 2011-09-13 15:10, John Fitton wrote: > An API does not and should not determine the underlying security architecture > compliance to security policy. The API should be 100% agnostic to an MLS, > MILS, MSLS or SLS security architecture. I was trying to be very careful with this use case, but I went too far. Recall, that on 2011-09-08 14:14, I wrote: > FYI: By adding this use case, I'm not saying that CICM needs to support > Multiple Levels of Security (MLS) and/or Multiple Independent Levels of > Security (MILS), but I am saying we shouldn't do anything to prevent someone > from using it those configurations, if they so choose. > See http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lanz-cicm-lm-01#section-1.4 The point of the use case is to say "CICM should not interfere with systems in which there are multiple levels of security" (but it doesn't do anything to help either). Therefore, I believe that this use cases any and all "container" configurations in which there are multiple security levels. > 2. Key exchange - Is it going to cover all types - IPSec, SSL/TLS/DTLS? The use case is generic--that CICM should support secure key exchange; the analysis will evaluate the feasibility of using those protocols with the CICM model. > 3. How about voice over IP use case? Part of it would fall under the > networking arena, but there would be some specifics pertaining to VoIP - like > support of SRTP. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something, but is there some fundamental difference between this use case and the regular two-domain use case? > 4. I forget, does CICM support the ability to write down SADs into the crypto > module? Assuming SAD is "Security Association Database", then, no, there aren't currently specific CICM API commands for managing the SAD as an entity unto itself. Creating channels will have effects on the SAD, but CICM doesn't expose that level of detail to the application. Lev _______________________________________________ cicm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cicm
