Subject: [Anima] Proposal of enhancing the BRSKI example scope with CMP

From: "Fries, Steffen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2018 16:45:04 +0000

Hello,

I have a question regarding the utilized enrollment protocols in BRSKI.

The current BRSKI draft addresses the bootstrapping of a secure infrastructure based on existent manufacturer certificates. This is for sure a basic requirement in industrial applications to enable secure service deployment or device integration. The current document utilizes EST to provide a realization example for the BRSKI approach. This already fits perfect for the energy automation domain, as  EST is already been envisioned/utilized as enrollment protocol in IEC defined security. As we experience, there are other scenarios like industrial automation or intelligent traffic systems, which feature different enrollment approaches, like CMP, but could leverage the generic BRSKI approach, we would like to propose to also consider CMP as further example for BRSKI. In contrast to EST, CMP builds on a self-contained container, which are independent from the transport. Hence, they can be easily processed in online (connected) or offline scenarios, even if no direct network access is possible. As CMP is very versatile, there is the option to profile the protocol to only support the features needed for a specific application. The LTE profile of CMP is one example of "simplifying" CMP by requiring only 3 Handshake messages to be supported. This profiling reduces the burden on the device implementing CMP to not support all of its features.

Even though the BRSKI document is already advanced, we would like to propose to also include CMP as further example for certificate enrollment in BRSKI. This inclusion would make it also easier for other standards or frameworks to consider security bootstrapping based on BRSKI.
I hope it is okay to raise the question of scope enhancements of BRSKI in terms of mapped enrollment protocols on the mailing list and not wait till the next IETF meeting regarding a discussion. If this proposal is accepted, we are very eager on providing a mapping section for the draft using a similar approach as section 5 takes for defining BRSKI as extension to EST.

Any thoughts regarding such an enhancement?

Best regards
Steffen

--
Steffen Fries
Siemens AG
Corporate Technology
Research and Development for Digitalization and Automation
IT Security
CT RDA ITS
Otto-Hahn-Ring 6
81739 Muenchen, Germany
Tel.: +49 89 636-633604
Fax: +49 89 636-48000
mailto:[email-masked]
www.siemens.com/ingenuityforlife<https://siemens.com/ingenuityforlife>

Siemens Aktiengesellschaft: Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Gerhard Cromme; Managing Board: Joe Kaeser, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer; Roland Busch, Lisa Davis, Klaus Helmrich, Janina Kugel, Cedrik Neike, Michael Sen, Ralf P. Thomas; Registered offices: Berlin and Munich, Germany; Commercial registries: Berlin Charlottenburg, HRB 12300, Munich, HRB 6684; WEEE-Reg.-No. DE 23691322