**Session Date/Time:** 06 Nov 2023 14:30

# secdispatch

## Summary

The secdispatch session covered three topics: expected signed mail, on-network path validation, and a sub-DDoS architecture. The discussion on path validation raised concerns about the security benefits and appropriate venue for further work, resulting in a need for more discussion and a potential BAF. The presentation on signed mail focused on user experience challenges and potential solutions, with suggestions for lamps, a BAF, and consultation with the ART area. The sub-DDoS architecture presentation received feedback regarding deployment density and the need for clear use cases.

## Key Discussion Points

*   **Expected Signed Mail:**
    *   The core issue is the poor user experience and lack of clear benefit for end-to-end signing of email.
    *   Discussion focused on signaling recipient expectations for signed mail.
    *   There was a discussion regarding the relationship to email encryption, user experience, and protocol design.
    *   Molestation of emails in transit was raised as a challenge.
*   **On-Network Path Validation:**
    *   The presentation explored adding trustworthiness to routing paths.
    *   The core gap is the need for a proof of transit mechanism to verify forwarding integrity.
    *   Concerns were raised about the applicability and potential security issues if trusted parties are not adjacent or if the "transit" proof is not complete.
    *   Preventing spoofing was identified as a potential use case.
    *   It was suggested that misconfiguration detection could be more valuable than security aspects.
*   **Sub-DDoS Architecture:**
    *   The presentation explored a DDoS architecture leveraging source address validation techniques.
    *   A key idea is the incremental deployment of sub-devices and sharing of spoofed source address information.
    *   Concerns were raised about the necessary density of deployed sub-devices and attack traffic in those networks for the approach to be effective.
    *   The need for clear and realistic use cases was emphasized.
    *   It was mentioned that any such system needed to be evaluated whether it constitutes unacceptable pervasive passive monitoring.

## Decisions and Action Items

*   **On-Network Path Validation:**
    *   **Decision:** Further discussion is needed before determining a suitable dispatch location. A BAF might be appropriate.
    *   **Action Item:** Presenters will hold a side meeting on Tuesday evening and share the outcome on the sec-dispatch mailing list.
*   **Expected Signed Mail:**
    *   **Decision:** No immediate dispatch decision. Further consultation is needed with the ART area and potential liaison with the MOG.
    *   **Action Item:** Chairs will consult with ART and consider a BAF.
*   **Sub-DDoS Architecture:**
    *   **Decision:** More discussion needed; no dispatch at this stage.
    *   **Action Item:** Presenters will propose a clearly defined use case.

## Next Steps

*   Continue discussions on the sec-dispatch mailing list.
*   Explore potential BAFs for both On-Network Path Validation and Expected Signed Mail.
*   Consult with relevant parties (ART, MOG) to determine the best path forward for the discussed topics.