Skip to content

Meetingminutes Minutes21082019

Bob Relyea edited this page Mar 4, 2025 · 1 revision

August 21, 2019 Meeting Minutes

Meeting commenced 1:00 PM PST

  • Roll call (Tony) - quorum achieved.
  • Tony C taking minutes.

Attendance

  • Attendance noted in KAVI

Proposed agenda

  • Agenda
  • Roll call
  • Review / approval of the agenda
  • Approve Minutes (07 August 2019)
  • V3.0 Items
    • PR comments review
  • V3.1
    • Status
  • Comment: C_SetPIN with multiple PINs; authenticated CKO_DATA handling
  • Comment: Suggestion of two new functions in pkcs11-Version 3
  • Comment: Behavior of C_Decrypt in pkcs#11
  • New business
  • Next meeting
  • Call for late arrivals
  • Adjourn

Motion to approve Agenda

  • Daniel M moved, Bruce R seconded. No objections, comments or abstentions. Agenda approved.

Motion to approve meeting minutes

  • August 7, 2019
  • Dieter B moved, Bruce R seconded. No objections, additional comments or abstentions. Minutes approved.

v3.0 Items

  • Tony C still working through the 4 PR comments.
  • Action Items - Draft responses for TC review on next call:
    • Item 1 - Tony C
    • Item 2 - Tony C
    • Item 3 - Tony C
    • Item 4 - Tony C
  • Draft content will be placed into the PR responses file (.xls) in the repository.
  • Tony will endeavour to publish this with enough time for folks to review prior to our next call.

v3.1

Status

  • Tony C
  • Bob R suggested inclusion of IKE_KDF include a set of mechanisms needed IPSec
  • Tim H additional XML testing items
  • Daniel M suggested we clarify the use of error messages around user login - this will need to be added to the v3.1 wiki.

Comment: C_SetPIN with multiple PINs; authenticated CKO_DATA handling

  • Tony still working on this one

Comment: Suggestion of two new functions in pkcs11-Version 3

  • Daniel M - My rough assessment would be that “wully” is mixing communication with a token and PKCS #11 interface functionality in an invalid way. Encrypting the communication between the host and the token is certainly best practice, but it’s outside of the standard. Actually, it’s also required, for example, to secure data provided to C_Encrypt and returned from C_Decrypt. If there is an encrypted channel a CKA_OBJECT can be transmitted in plain text from an application point of view and there is no need for these two functions. So, IMO they don’t make sense.

Comment: Behavior of C_Decrypt in pkcs#11

  • Seems to revolve around obtaining an adequate buffer size for a C_Decrypt operation and/or stacking multiple C_Decrypt for larger blocks. List consensus is that we need mor prescriptive content on the usage of C_Decrypt.

New business

  • None

Next meeting

  • Next meeting will be 4 September August 2019.

Call for late arrivals

  • 2 noted

Motion to Adjourn

  • Bruce R moved. Daniel M seconded. No objections, comments or abstentions.

Meeting Adjourned at 1:17 PM PST

Clone this wiki locally