Subject: [Webpush] Eric Rescorla's Discuss on draft-ietf-webpush-encryption-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

From: Eric Rescorla <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 17:16:22 -0700

Eric Rescorla has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-webpush-encryption-08: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-webpush-encryption/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Given that you have a static key on the UA, the security considerations
should discuss point verification, or why it's not needed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

S 1.
   This document describes how messages sent using this protocol can be
   secured against inspection, modification and falsification by a Push
   Service.

"forgery" is more customary than falsification.

S 3.3.

   key_info = "WebPush: info" || 0x00 || ua_public || as_public

You should make clear that the string is not null-terminated. Ugh, I know.

S 3.4.
You should clearly separate which pieces are defined in this document
and which are defined in the HTTP encryption document.