- From: Taher ElGamal <elgamal@netscape.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 13:16:40 -0800
- To: Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@consensus.com>
- CC: John Macko <jmacko@web.compuserve.com>, "'ietf-tls@w3.org'" <ietf-tls@w3.org>
Christopher Allen wrote: > > At 1:29 PM -0800 11/25/96, John Macko wrote: > >I happened across the following quote from the Technology Preview of > >Constellation - Netscape's new netcasting and desktop-customization > >technology. > > > >"Constellation will allow you to access your HomePort from any location > >or any computer. You no longer need to be tied to your desktop to be > >productive. For example, when traveling between home and work or between > >multiple offices, you can enter your ***user name and password*** for > >your HomePort and work with all of your information, just as you left > >it, regardless of where you are or what type of computer you are > >running. " > > > >Given the reluctance of Netscape to support Passwords in the TLS > >protocol, I am a bit curious as to the underlying technology Netscape > >will be using for password based authentication to your "HomePort." > > > >Does anyone have any insight into this? > > I don't think that Netscape has objections to supporting passwords -- > instead I think the various point of views on password authentication have > more to do with different ideas on the appropriate layer in the networking > model to add authentication. > > Ultimately the problem resides in the fact that the technology that we are > using to secure the integrity of a connection (i.e. the rsa or > diffie-helman key exchange to derive a shared master secret for encryption) > is closely related to the technology that we use to authenticate each end > of the connection (i.e. RSA or DSS certificates.) > > I believe that Microsoft's position is that since SSL offers authentication > (through the use of certificates) that other forms of authentication should > be done at that layer as well. > > In contrast, Netscape's position appears to be that certificate-based > authentication is fundementally different (and believed to be more secure) > than password based authentication, thus it doesn't deserve to be at the > same level. > > Others have objections to SSL for architectural reasons -- they say that > SSL should not be doing authentication at all, and/or that it should rely > on other protocols or layers for key exchange and authentication. > > I'm not sure how this will all pan out. There is a legitimate user need for > standardizing non-certificate based authentication (whether secret-key for > legacy purposes, kerberos, or some other authentication mechanism) yet it > there is also a legitimate concern regarding both architecture issues > (layering) and the differing levels of security offered by different > authentication schemes. > > So far there are two internet drafts relating to alternative authentication > methods for TLS: > <ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tls-passauth-00.txt> > <ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tls-kerb-cipher-suites-00.txt > > > > I have heard that there may even be two more internet-drafts submitted on > this issue by tomorrow's deadline! > > Obviously this will be an important issue to resolve for the future of TLS, > however, I do hope that this issue doesn't get in the way of moving SSL 3.0 > under IETF change control. That goal is my personal objective. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ..Christopher Allen Consensus Development Corporation.. > ..<ChristopherA@consensus.com> 1563 Solano Avenue #355.. > .. Berkeley, CA 94707-2116.. > ..Home of "SSL Plus: o510/559-1500 f510/559-1505.. > .. SSL 3.0 Integration Suite(tm)" <http://www.consensus.com/SSLPlus/>.. Actually all it means is that we need to support password authentication whether or not SSL is used for that application -- folks all applications need to use passwords at some point and will need to do something irrespective of whether SSL is used or not. Taher -- Taher Elgamal elgamal@netscape.com Chief Scientist, Netscape Communications (T) 415 937 2898, (F) 415 428 4054
Received on Tuesday, 26 November 1996 16:17:43 UTC