[Acme] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-yusef-acme-3rd-party-device-attestation-00.txt

2019-01-12 Thread Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
Hi, I have submitted the draft below that defines a mechanism to automate the deployment of certificates to devices based on an attestation from 3rd-party server that has authority over the device. I would appreciate any review and feedback on this document. Regards, Rifaat -- Forwarde

Re: [Acme] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-yusef-acme-3rd-party-device-attestation-00.txt

2019-01-15 Thread Ilari Liusvaara
On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 12:38:59PM -0500, Rifaat Shekh-Yusef wrote: > Hi, > > I have submitted the draft below that defines a mechanism to automate the > deployment of certificates to devices based on an attestation from > 3rd-party server that has authority over the device. > I would appreciate a

Re: [Acme] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-yusef-acme-3rd-party-device-attestation-00.txt

2019-01-15 Thread Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
Thanks Ilari, Please, see me reply inline... Regards, Rifaat On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 1:13 PM Ilari Liusvaara wrote: > On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 12:38:59PM -0500, Rifaat Shekh-Yusef wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have submitted the draft below that defines a mechanism to automate the > > deployment o

Re: [Acme] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-yusef-acme-3rd-party-device-attestation-00.txt

2019-01-15 Thread Ryan Sleevi
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 1:58 PM Rifaat Shekh-Yusef wrote: > The proposed mechanism does not suggest the CA perform a domain validation > based on > an attestation from the Device Authority. > Instead, the Client that already has an account with the ACME server and > proved that it has control > o

Re: [Acme] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-yusef-acme-3rd-party-device-attestation-00.txt

2019-01-15 Thread Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
Thanks Ryan, Please, see my reply inline... Regards, Rifaat On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 2:56 PM Ryan Sleevi wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 1:58 PM Rifaat Shekh-Yusef > wrote: > >> The proposed mechanism does not suggest the CA perform a domain >> validation based on >> an attestation from