- caops-wg - lists.ogf.org

Last call for comments on GFD.125 update - today!
by Jens Jensen 10 Oct '13

10 Oct '13

If you meant to comment and haven't, today would be a great time to do it. Mind you, one of the comments is a request for an extension to the comment period. http://redmine.ogf.org/projects/editor-pubcom/boards/14 Thanks --jens

1 0

Reminder - GFD.125 document
by Jens Jensen 16 Sep '13

16 Sep '13

With the next CAOPS imminent, perhaps a timely reminder that the revised GFD.125 document is still out for a renewed round of pub com, having seen quite a few changes at OGF38. http://redmine.ogf.org/boards/14/topics/16 I know some of us discussed it over coffee today - it's open for PC till 10 Oct. (that's 10 decimal!) Thanks --jens

1 0

CAOPS meeting tomorrow
by Jens Jensen 16 Sep '13

16 Sep '13

Heya all CAOPSers, and honoray CAOPsers, The CAOPS meeting will take place tomorrow at 0900 in Comendador. Apologies for making you miss Claire's morningn plenary. Please tell other CAOPSers whom I may have missed. Thanks --jens

1 0

Revised Grid Certificate Profile (GFD.125bis) version 0.7 uploaded
by David Groep 10 Jun '13

10 Jun '13

Dear all, Following the discussions at OGF38a and addressing the public comments, a new version (0.7) of the Grid Certificate Profile is now at: http://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf_files/25 It contains the following material changes: - attribute names have been normalised and changed to match RFC5280 - explanatory text clarified in several places by re-ordering sentences - SHA-2 description for CAs and EECs harmonised - table headings added for DNs and attributes, and clarified normative language columns - expanded the list of eKU values, instead of refering to non-existent section 5 - fixed one 'rfc822emailAddress' misnomer to read "rfc822Name" Also, when implementing these changes I found one inconsistency: - subject RDN description in section 3.3.1 mentioned only PrintableString and UTF-8 string, but in section 3.3.4 and 3.3.6 it specifically added IA5String and advised its use. Added IA5String as permissible to 3.3.1 and 3.3.3 as well, in particular to encode the "@" sign in commonName attributes. The 7-bit printable ASCII subset of UTF-8 is given as permissible. The changes are highlighted in the PDF at http://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf_files/13083 Depending on Jens or Greg, this now may need to go back to public comment after the WG has reviewed the changes (the updates are minor but not insignificant). Best, DavidG. -- David Groep ** Nikhef, Dutch National Institute for Sub-atomic Physics,PDP/Grid group ** ** Room: H1.50 Phone: +31 20 5922179, PObox 41882, NL-1009DB Amsterdam NL **

2 1

Notes on Thursday's CAOPS
by Jens Jensen 05 Jun '13

05 Jun '13

Folks, The CAOPS/IGTF session on Thursday is in the Copenhagen room at MECC. It will start after lunch, so 14:00-15:30 CEST. Apart from the planned agenda items of private key protection, reviewing public comments to the new (proposed recommendation) GFD.125 (and possibly more stuff), we will also hear about African federations which are being set up in the context of the CHAIN-REDS activity - if these become IGTF-capable, we will get 5-6 new countries. Also, it would be interesting to hear more about the Kryptus HSM. We have had some interesting discussions about it here at the conference with our Brazilian friends. Cheers --jens

1 0

Meeting at OGF 38a
by Jens Jensen 27 May '13

27 May '13

Folks, This may be a bit late but it has taken some time to get feedback from people. We should have a room for a couple of sessions on Thursday afternoon for security stuff. As I haven't had much feedback on proposals for the security area, I suggest we use the first for CAOPS/IGTF and the second for FEDSEC/IDEL/VOMSPROC. There should be enough time to get something useful done in the groups. It is possible we may not have a projector? In which case we could use some form of screen sharing. See you in Maastricht! -j

1 0

Some gentle reminders...
by Jens Jensen 24 May '13

24 May '13

Folks, First of all a reminder that everybody's favourite document, GFD.125-bis is still available for public comments, until 10 May: http://redmine.ogf.org/projects/editor-pubcom/boards/8 Secondly, there is an OGF coming up which as you will just have been informed is in an entanglement between two locations. The XSEDE schedule is here: https://www.xsede.org/web/xsede13/schedule but doesn't seem to have any security area content other than the OGF (although I may have missed it); TNC does have identity management and federations on Tuesday https://tnc2013.terena.org/core/schedule/list/day/04%252F06%252F2013 (although they're parallel!) They are not even at the same time, so you could attend both! If you are a group chair of one of the security area groups, please let me know what you're planning. If you are in a group and not a group chair, can you please let your group chair know? Thanks --jens

4 3

Fwd: Final call: Invitation to the 5th FIM4R meeting on March 20/21 2013, at Paul Scherrer Institut
by Sill, Alan 15 Mar '13

15 Mar '13

FYI - please see message below. As you may know, OGF 38 will be split between sessions at the XSEDE 2013 conference in San Diego July 22-25, with the networking groups meeting at the TNC 2013 conference in Maastricht. Details for the latter events are below. https://tnc2013.terena.org/core/event/20 And also create the registration link for this event. Please share this with your contacts / expected participants - EVERYONE needs to register. The meeting will start at 14:00 on Thursday, 6 June 2013. http://www.terena.org/events/details.php?event_id=2530 If the GLIF/OGF participants would also like to attend the TNC than they would need to register for the conference via the regular registration: https://tnc2013.terena.org/web/participate/register If they would only like to attend the Thursday morning, then there will be a limited number of day registrations available on site as well. There has been some discussion of having OGF groups involved with identity management also meet Thursday afternoon to Friday morning after the TNC, which itself includes several talks of interest in this area. If you are interested in such a meeting, please contact Jens Jensen with a copy to me ASAP. We would like to encourage the Federated ID community to submit informational and/or experience documents to OGF for publication to capture the results of these workshops for the overall benefit of the community. Best regards, Alan Begin forwarded message: Resent-From: <federatedIdentity-members(a)cern.ch<mailto:federatedIdentity-members@cern.ch>> From: Heinz J Weyer <heinz-josef.weyer(a)psi.ch<mailto:heinz-josef.weyer@psi.ch>> Subject: Final call: Invitation to the 5th FIM4R meeting on March 20/21 2013, at Paul Scherrer Institut Date: March 15, 2013 10:16:27 AM CDT To: FederatedIdentity Members <federatedIdentity-members(a)cern.ch<mailto:federatedIdentity-members@cern.ch>> Dear colleague, registration for the Federated ID Management for Research Facilities is still possible. Further information,including abstracts of the talks, is available under http://indico.psi.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=2230 Hoping to seeing you soon, Mirjam van Daalen, PSI Bob Jones, CERN Heinz J Weyer, PSI -- PD Dr. Heinz J. Weyer Eml: heinz-josef.weyer(a)psi.ch<mailto:heinz-josef.weyer@psi.ch> SwissFEL Fon: +41 (56) 310 3494 Paul-Scherrer Institut Web: http://www.psi.ch/swissfel/ CH-5232 Villigen PSI http://www.pandata.eu<http://www.pandata.eu/> Switzerland http://www.crisp-fp7.eu<http://www.crisp-fp7.eu/>

1 0

Updated private key protection
by Jens Jensen 10 Mar '13

10 Mar '13

Still ain't perfect but hopefully better (still). Would be useful to get feedback from CAOPS now. https://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf_files/13021 Thanks --jens PS if there's time I may have another pass through it.

1 0

US Presidential Directive: NIST Cybersecurity Framework Request for Information
by Sill, Alan 13 Feb '13

13 Feb '13

Dear Jens, GFSG et al., Last night in the annual "State of the Union" address, the President of the US announced that he had directed the US Department of Commerce to initiate development of a new Cybersecurity Framework specifically focused on standards and best practices to guide industry in reducing cyber risks overall to networks and computers. This announcement has been followed today by corresponding one from the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (contained in the Dept. of Commerce) as linked below: http://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/2013/02/13/national-institute-s… Within this announcement is a notification of the upcoming issuance of a Request for Information (RFI) as summarized below: Summary: Recognizing that the national and economic security of the United States depends on the reliable functioning of critical infrastructure, the President under the Executive Order "Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity" has directed NIST to work with stakeholders to develop a voluntary framework for reducing cyber risks to critical infrastructure. The Framework will consist of standards, guidelines, and best practices to promote the protection of information and information systems supporting critical infrastructure operations. The prioritized, flexible, repeatable, and cost-effective approach of the framework will help owners and operators of critical infrastructure to manage cybersecurity-related risk while protecting business confidentiality, individual privacy and civil liberties. A response from OGF summarizing OGF's technologies for security for large-scale production grid, cloud and distributed computing would not go amiss, and (given that NIST is an important part of the security standards landscape in the US and internationally) be a good place to highlight our OGF security technologies. The RFI, attached, includes the question "What role(s) do or should national/international standards and organizations that develop national/international standards play in critical infrastructure cybersecurity conformity assessment?" I believe it would be worthwhile for OGF as an organization to respond to this RFI. Materials that we gather and submit to formulate as elements of this response could also be useful in other places within the OGF community and document development process. It may also be useful for the IGTF to consider formulating a response. Your thoughts on formulating an OGF response to the RFI would be appreciated. While the due dates for response to the RFI are not yet set, the notification that is attached to this message does say that responses will be requested "within 45 days" of it issuance when it does come out. Link: http://www.nist.gov/itl/cyberframework.cfm Alan

1 0