Subject: [TLS] security considerations for draft-rescorla-tls-subcerts

From: Brian Sniffen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 16:54:29 -0500

I'm trying to understand the adversary model in which Delegated
Credentials are helpful.  It seems like if you weren't going to sign off
on a cloud service provider getting a certificate before, you *probably*
shouldn't let them have a delegated credential now---but if you were
going to do so, *and* you don't believe revocation works (wise!), now
you can offer a delegated credential and be safer?

That corresponds to an adversary who can compromise a cloud service and
learn the customers' private keys---but can only do so rarely.  Now
instead of having ~ 1 year of use of your certificate, that adversary
has a few days of use of your credential.  But if the cloud service
is regularly breached, you're as bad off as before (but no worse?)

It sounds like the first years of delegated credentials will see them
used in tandem with split systems (Lurk, Akamai and Cloudflare's various patented
approaches)---then the primary benefit of delegated credentials is lower
latency for session establishment.

But maybe the idea is to avoid the first circumstance and emphasize that
these are for the second case.  Authors, can you describe what you have
in mind?

Thanks,
Brian

-- 
Brian Sniffen
Akamai Technologies