Re: confidentiality and transfers

["William Tan" <william.tan@i-dns.net>]

1.  Since confidentiality is a key issue, and the provisioning registry
protocol is built upon other protocols, it would be wise to choose something
that provides confidentiality at the transport layer (TLS or another
protocol).

>>>>> However, for the e-mail transport, do we define an encryption
mechanism?  Does the transport team have anything to say about this?


If the unique "registry handle" is used as the check to make modifications
to a domain registration, the generation and transmission of that handle
must be secured from evedroppers.

>>>>> I would expect implementation to check the handle against the
authenticated peer (registrar) to see if the modification can be authorized.
Object handles should be public, but may be shielded from the end-user of
course.


It might be necessary to have an authentication of a registrar by another
registrar before any objects are transferred.  Otherwise, an attacker that
has aquired the handle for a domain registration could assume control of it
by impersonating another registrar and requesting the domain to be
transferred to the attacker.

>>>>> It is documented in the requirement draft in section 3.4.3 and 3.4.4.
The EPP draft (2.6.3.4) also specified the semantics for the transfer
process, though a full example would be helpful.


wil