Last Call Review of draft-pal-eidr-urn-2016-01
review-pal-eidr-urn-2016-01-secdir-lc-yu-2016-07-06-00

Request Review of draft-pal-eidr-urn-2016
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 03)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2016-07-01
Requested 2016-06-09
Authors Pierre-Anthony Lemieux
Draft last updated 2016-07-06
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -01 by Vijay Gurbani (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -01 by Vijay Gurbani (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -01 by Taylor Yu (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -01 by Mehmet Ersue (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Taylor Yu
State Completed
Review review-pal-eidr-urn-2016-01-secdir-lc-yu-2016-07-06
Reviewed rev. 01 (document currently at 03)
Review result Ready
Review completed: 2016-07-06

Review
review-pal-eidr-urn-2016-01-secdir-lc-yu-2016-07-06

I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's 
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the 
IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the 
security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat 
these comments just like any other last call comments.

Summary: ready

The security considerations section of this document seems reasonable.
The following sentence seems unnecessarily specific, but it was also
present in RFC 7302 and doesn't seem harmful to retain.

   "Note,
   however, that failure to conform to the syntactic and lexical
   equivalence rules in this specification when using an EIDR Identifier
   as a criteria for accessing restricted resources can result in
   granting unauthorized access to these resources."

It appears to me that it would require a confluence of multiple serious
implementation and/or configuration flaws for the above concerns to be
relevant, e.g., a default-allow policy combined with differing lookup
procedures for authorization versus content retrieval.