Hi Samita,

Do you think PUFs are useful authentication technologies for IoT devices?

Ciao
Hannes

-----Original Message-----
From: IoT-DIR [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Samita Chakrabarti
Sent: 06 November 2017 10:37
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: [IoT-DIR] Iotdir early review of draft-ietf-lwig-crypto-sensors-04

Reviewer: Samita Chakrabarti
Review result: Ready with Nits

I have reviewed draft-ietf-lwig-crypto-sensors-04 document for  IOT-Directorate 
review. The following are my comments:

General : The document is easy reading and informative about current and 
previous work. It is ready to publish with minor changes based on review 
comments.

Other comments:
Introduction:
 It might be useful to discuss/clarify that multi-level security may be  
important for IOT devices  all the way from 'bootstrapping and management' to  
application security. That perhaps can include obtaining IP-addresses  
securely, mutual authentication between server and devices , etc. ( see
 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6lo-ap-nd-03) in those cases where each 
 device has an IP address.

Section 2:
Regarding problems of provisioning and management of networks for the IOT 
devices there may be additional issues – 1) different types of IOT devices and 
the lack of standards way to provision them as they might be talking different 
RF technologies and running L2 protocols only. 2) The iot nodes may be moving 
individually or collectively and change networks; identifying the movement of 
the iot nodes or identifying a particular node at any point of time uniquely 
requires an intrinsic identification which might be useful to set during 
bootstrapping of the node

Regarding related work – does it consider IETF IOT security work only? There 
have been some work and thought process going on regarding blockchain IOT 
security in the industry. Perhaps that is out-of-scope of this document, but I 
wanted to mention for authors’ considerations.

Section 5:
Authors of the document may also want to browse a SRAM PUF based technology 
which provides unique ID based authentication mechanism.
https://www.intrinsic-id.com/intrinsic-id-joins-wi-sun-alliance/

Section 9:
Does the example simulate any particular deployment model or research 
experiments ? It might be good to clarify that. Section 10 and 11: Looks like 
section 11 is closely related to section 10. Should they be combined together ?
Else some more text is needed in section 10 on design trade-offs.

Section 13:
Does this document recommend one layer of security to IOT devices ? There are 
different types of IOT devices – some of them are very tiny and some are more 
capable. Some definitely benefit for multi-level security  than single layer of 
security.  L2 security is generally recommended for for all IOT networks. Does 
data object protection only protect the  application data (payload)  or more ?

Thanks for the initiative in documenting the valuable work in IOT security 
implementation and crypto comparison. -Samita


_______________________________________________
IoT-DIR mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iot-dir
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are 
confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, 
please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any 
other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any 
medium. Thank you.
_______________________________________________
Lwip mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip

Reply via email to