On Sat, Jul 19, 2025 at 4:50 AM Thomas Fossati <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Ekr,
>
> On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 at 22:27, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote:
> > [...]
> > This brings us to the question of the binding to TLS. As a technical
> > matter, what this mechanism does is bind the operating environment on
> > the peer to the key used to authenticate the peer, but that leaves the
> > person trying to enforce higher-level properties with very little
> > guidance. What properties am I supposed to look at in the code to know
> > if the server operator can in this instance look at individual
> > responses? Because those properties are being provided by TLS (as
> > opposed to, say, encrypting over the top to the TEE), then it's
> > the responsibility of this document to provide some guidance (at
> minimum).
>
> I believe the properties you are referring to above are out of the
> scope of aTLS.
>

I don't agree. The relevant properties are TLS specific.


>
> Instead, it’s RATS territory, specifically that kind of logic would be
> encoded in the "appraisal policy for evidence" and "appraisal policy
> for attestation results" (see section 4.2 of RFC9334 [1]).
>
> [1] https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc9334.html#section-4.2.
>
> Such a policy should check that:
> 1. The workload that implements your DAP-like logic has the expected
> measurement(s) (and therefore can be linked to an audited, possibly
> open-source codebase);
> 2. The platform that is executing your workload can provide an
> isolated execution environment for your workload (e.g., it’s a
> confidential computing platform), and ensure that the state of the
> platform (in terms of measured boot and run-time, configuration and
> state flags) is as expected;
> 3. The TLS authentication key is within the TEE boundary and, as such,
> it’s protected from exfiltration/manipulation.
>

> This last property is expressed, at least partly, via the EA binder,
> so I guess it belongs in aTLS.
>

As I said, it's nowhere near sufficient for the TLS authentication key to
be in the TEE. For instance, there has to be a guarantee that the system
not exfiltrate the traffic keys.

-Ekr


>
> cheers, t
>
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to