Subject: [Isms] #14: MUST the SSHSM model provide mutual authentication, etc.?

From: "David B Harrington" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:55:10 -0400

#14: MUST the SSHSM model provide mutual authentication of the client
and server, and MUST it authenticate, integrity-check, and encrypt the
messages? 

David Harrington
[email-masked]

_______________________________________________
Isms mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isms

---

From: "Randy Presuhn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 13:05:11 -0700

Hi -

> From: "David B Harrington" <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 2:55 PM
> Subject: [Isms] #14: MUST the SSHSM model provide mutual authentication,etc.?
>
...

It would seem rather pointless if support for these capabilities was not mandatory.

Randy

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 21:01:50 -0400

>>>>> "David" == David B Harrington <[email-masked]> writes:

    David> #14: MUST the SSHSM model provide mutual authentication of
    David> the client and server, and MUST it authenticate,
    David> integrity-check, and encrypt the messages?

I think these are matters for the lower layer (ssh).  I think it is
reasonable for you to assume the lower layer is providing mutual
authentication, sufficient integrity protection and sufficient
confidentiality.

My other two comments were mostly me talking as an AD.  This is mostly
me talking as an individual.  However if your solution to this
question adds significant complexity, I'll need justification for the
solution in order to take the document to the IESG.

--Sam