Re: [802.21] [Access Control] Activity Kick-off
I agree that MIH-level security including access control for
Information Service would be needed in general.
On the other hand, I think that this is a security-related discussion
that could be done first within a security-related Study Group we have
been discussing for a long time.
Having said that, my take is, let the specification go without this
functionality, and later on try to amend the specification with this
functionality together with other security-related amendment.
Regards,
Yoshihiro Ohba
On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 02:16:58PM -0600, Srinivas Sreemanthula wrote:
> Hi Ele,
> I cannot think 21 being deployed without this functionality. If 802.21
> does not incorporate it in the spec, it may have to done in some
> proprietary way. The followign are my thoughts.
>
> 1. It would be good to have a subscription id separately (from MIHF-ID,
> once we know what it is exactly).
> 2. How to authenticate the user/id? It would be natural to think of
> some bootstrapping mechanism at MIH level. We can also generate some
> session and associated policies and parameters if needed (for that
> user).
> 3. We also need message authentication. Some sort of keys for MIC usage
> derived from the auth exchange would be a good way forward.
> 4. IMO, policy distribution is perhaps not in the scope of 802.21.
> 5. Mechansims for information queries tied to user id (which may filter
> the information parameters)
> 6. Define restrictions with unsecure queries (that don't use
> authenticated means)
>
> Regards,
> Srini
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Hepworth, Eleanor [mailto:eleanor.hepworth@ROKE.CO.UK]
> Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 9:39 AM
> To: STDS-802-21@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: [802.21] [Access Control] Activity Kick-off
>
> Hi all,
>
> As you may recall, there was a presentation in London about providing
> access control to IEs held by the Information Server. This was intended
> to start addressing some concerns raised by operators about what
> information is shared with whom.
>
> After a chat with Vivek, we thought it might be easier to continue these
> discussions on the 802.21 mailing list (hopefully interested Ambient
> people will have signed up by now), so here is an e-mail to kick this
> activity off.
>
> The main implication of introducing support for Access Control seems to
> be the following:
>
> 1) we need to include something in the query message that identifies the
> user.
> 2) we need someway to verify the user identity
> 3) we need someway to distribute policies associated with that user to
> the Information Server so it can decide what information it should send.
>
> Options for 1):
> - introduce a new user identity IE that is included in the request
> messages
> - make use of the current MIHF ID (although some reservations about this
> option were expressed in London)
>
> Options for 2):
> This is quite a complicated issue, especially when you consider roaming
> scenarios with multiple domains (as Raffaele discussed during his
> presentation - 21-07-0035).
>
> Possibly the simplest approach would be to reuse some, or all, of the
> existing AAA infrastructure somehow, and limit the information the user
> can access before authentication to a set of non-sensitive IEs..?
> Otherwise we will end up trying to define our own authentication
> procedures.
>
> Options for 3):
> Lots. But I'm not sure this is something that falls within the scope of
> 802.21?
>
> Comments/opinions appreciated.
>
> Thanks
>
> Ele
>