Subject: Channel Binding [was Re: [Emu] GPSK issue - KDF Data]

From: Yoshihiro Ohba <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 08:55:01 -0400

Dear all,

I have been proposing to use a stronger way of channel binding,
stronger in the sense that the keys generated by EAP methods cannot be
used by a non-intended authenticator even if the keys are incorrectly
delivered to such an authenticator.  Key mixing with KDF (such as the
one described in draft-ohba-eap-channel-binding-01.txt) is one
solution for such stronger channel binding but there can be other ways
such as tickets used by Kerberos.

I'd like to hear opinions from this list as to whether defining a
strong channel binding is not required at all even as an experimental
solution.

Yoshihiro Ohba

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

---

From: Lakshminath Dondeti <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 11:05:29 -0700

This topic has been discussed before on the EAP mailing list, here 
are some references:

http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/eap/msg04381.html
http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/eap/msg04385.html
http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/eap/msg04366.html

and more available at:

http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/eap/threads.html

Lakshminath