ietf-rats-wg · henkbirkholz · Jan 26, 2022 · Jan 25, 2022 · Jan 25, 2022 · Jan 25, 2022
diff --git a/draft-ietf-rats-reference-interaction-models.md b/draft-ietf-rats-reference-interaction-models.md
@@ -326,6 +326,75 @@ As soon as the Verifier receives the Evidence and the Event Logs, it appraises t
 Appraisal procedures are application-specific and can be conducted via comparison of the Claims with corresponding Reference Values, such as Reference Integrity Measurements.
 The final output of the Verifier are Attestation Results. Attestation Results constitute new Claim Sets about the properties and characteristics of an Attester, which enables Relying Parties, for example, to assess an Attester's trustworthiness.
 
+### Models and example sequences of Challenge/Response Remote Attestation
+According to RATS Architecture Document, two reference models for Challenge/Response Attestation has been proposed. This sections highlights the information flow bewteen the Attestor, Verifier and Relying Party undergoing Remote Attestation Procedure, using these models.
-According to RATS Architecture Document, two reference models for Challenge/Response Attestation has been proposed. This sections highlights the information flow bewteen the Attestor, Verifier and Relying Party undergoing Remote Attestation Procedure, using these models.
+According to the RATS Architecture , two reference models for Challenge/Response Attestation have been proposed. This sections highlights the information flows between the Attester, Verifier and Relying Party undergoing Remote Attestation Procedure, using these models.
-According to RATS Architecture Document, two reference models for Challenge/Response Attestation has been proposed. This sections highlights the information flow bewteen the Attestor, Verifier and Relying Party undergoing Remote Attestation Procedure, using these models.
+According to the RATS Architecture , two reference models for Challenge/Response Attestation have been proposed. This sections highlights the information flows between the Attester, Verifier and Relying Party undergoing Remote Attestation Procedure, using these models.
+
+1. Passport Model
+
+The passport modle is so named because of its resemblance to how nations issue passports to their citizens. In this Model, the attestation sequence is a
-The passport modle is so named because of its resemblance to how nations issue passports to their citizens. In this Model, the attestation sequence is a
+The passport model is so named because of its resemblance to how nations issue passports to their citizens. In this Model, the attestation sequence is a
-The passport modle is so named because of its resemblance to how nations issue passports to their citizens. In this Model, the attestation sequence is a
+The passport model is so named because of its resemblance to how nations issue passports to their citizens. In this model, the attestation sequence is a
-The passport modle is so named because of its resemblance to how nations issue passports to their citizens. In this Model, the attestation sequence is a
+The passport model is so named because of its resemblance to how nations issue passports to their citizens. In this Model, the attestation sequence is a
-The passport modle is so named because of its resemblance to how nations issue passports to their citizens. In this Model, the attestation sequence is a
+The passport model is so named because of its resemblance to how nations issue passports to their citizens. In this model, the attestation sequence is a
+two step procedure. In the first step, an Attester conveys Evidence to a Verifier which compares the Evidence against its appraisal policy.  The Verifier
-two step procedure. In the first step, an Attester conveys Evidence to a Verifier which compares the Evidence against its appraisal policy.  The Verifier
+two-step procedure. In the first step, an Attester conveys Evidence to a Verifier, which compares the Evidence against its appraisal policy.  The Verifier
-two step procedure. In the first step, an Attester conveys Evidence to a Verifier which compares the Evidence against its appraisal policy.  The Verifier
+two-step procedure. In the first step, an Attester conveys Evidence to a Verifier, which compares the Evidence against its appraisal policy.  The Verifier
+then gives back an Attestation Result to the Attester, which simply caches it. In the second step, the Attester presents the Attestation Result (and possibly additional Claims/evidence) to a Relying Party, which then compares this information against its own appraisal policy to establish the trustworthiness of the attestor.
-then gives back an Attestation Result to the Attester, which simply caches it. In the second step, the Attester presents the Attestation Result (and possibly additional Claims/evidence) to a Relying Party, which then compares this information against its own appraisal policy to establish the trustworthiness of the attestor.
+then gives back an Attestation Result to the Attester, which simply caches it. In the second step, the Attester presents the Attestation Result (and possibly additional Claims/evidence) to a Relying Party, which then compares this information against its own appraisal policy to establish the trustworthiness of the Attester.
-then gives back an Attestation Result to the Attester, which simply caches it. In the second step, the Attester presents the Attestation Result (and possibly additional Claims/evidence) to a Relying Party, which then compares this information against its own appraisal policy to establish the trustworthiness of the attestor.
+then gives back an Attestation Result to the Attester, which simply caches it. In the second step, the Attester presents the Attestation Result (and possibly additional Claims/evidence) to a Relying Party, which then compares this information against its own appraisal policy to establish the trustworthiness of the attester.
-then gives back an Attestation Result to the Attester, which simply caches it. In the second step, the Attester presents the Attestation Result (and possibly additional Claims/evidence) to a Relying Party, which then compares this information against its own appraisal policy to establish the trustworthiness of the attestor.
+then gives back an Attestation Result to the Attester, which simply caches it. In the second step, the Attester presents the Attestation Result (and possibly additional Claims/evidence) to a Relying Party, which then compares this information against its own appraisal policy to establish the trustworthiness of the Attester.
-then gives back an Attestation Result to the Attester, which simply caches it. In the second step, the Attester presents the Attestation Result (and possibly additional Claims/evidence) to a Relying Party, which then compares this information against its own appraisal policy to establish the trustworthiness of the attestor.
+then gives back an Attestation Result to the Attester, which simply caches it. In the second step, the Attester presents the Attestation Result (and possibly additional Claims/evidence) to a Relying Party, which then compares this information against its own appraisal policy to establish the trustworthiness of the attester.
+
+~~~~
+.----------.                                                .----------.                            .----------.
+| Attester |                                                | Verifier |                            | R. P.    |
+'----------'                                                '----------'                            '----------'
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+  generateClaims(attestingEnvironment)                            |                                      |
+     | => claims, eventLogs                                       |                                      |
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+     | <-- requestAttestation(handle, authSecIDs, claimSelection) |                                      |
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+  collectClaims(claims, claimSelection)                           |                                      |
+     | => collectedClaims                                         |                                      |
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+  generateEvidence(handle, authSecIDs, collectedClaims)           |                                      |
+     | => evidence                                                |                                      |
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+     | evidence, eventLogs -------------------------------------> |                                      |
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+     |                appraiseEvidence(evidence, eventLogs, refValues)                                   |
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+     |   attestationResults <-----------------------------------  |                                      |
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+     | attestationResults(evidence, results) ----------------------------------------------------------> |      |                                                            |                                      |
+     |                                                            |                                      |      |                                                            |                                      | appraiseResults()
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+~~~~
+
+2. BackGround Check Model
+
+The background-check model is so named because of the resemblance of how employers and volunteer organizations perform background checks. In this model, the attestation sequence is initiated by a Relying Party. The Attestor conveys Evidence to the Relying Party. Upon receiving evidence the Relying Party initiates a session with the Verifier. Once session is established, it forwards the received Evidence to the Verfier. The Verifier, compares the received Evidence to its appraisal policy for evidence and returns an Attestation Result to the Relying Party. The Relying Party then compares the
-The background-check model is so named because of the resemblance of how employers and volunteer organizations perform background checks. In this model, the attestation sequence is initiated by a Relying Party. The Attestor conveys Evidence to the Relying Party. Upon receiving evidence the Relying Party initiates a session with the Verifier. Once session is established, it forwards the received Evidence to the Verfier. The Verifier, compares the received Evidence to its appraisal policy for evidence and returns an Attestation Result to the Relying Party. The Relying Party then compares the
+The background-check model is so named because of the resemblance of how employers and volunteer organizations perform background checks. In this model, the attestation sequence is initiated by a Relying Party. The Attester conveys Evidence to the Relying Party, which does not process its payload, but relays the message and optionally checks it's signature against a policed trust anchor store. Upon receiving the evidence the Relying Party initiates a  with the Verifier. Once session is established, it forwards the received Evidence to the Verfier. The Verifier appraises the received Evidence according to its Appraisal Policy for Evidence and returns a corresponding Attestation Result to the Relying Party. The Relying Party then checks the
-The background-check model is so named because of the resemblance of how employers and volunteer organizations perform background checks. In this model, the attestation sequence is initiated by a Relying Party. The Attestor conveys Evidence to the Relying Party. Upon receiving evidence the Relying Party initiates a session with the Verifier. Once session is established, it forwards the received Evidence to the Verfier. The Verifier, compares the received Evidence to its appraisal policy for evidence and returns an Attestation Result to the Relying Party. The Relying Party then compares the
+The background-check model is so named because of the resemblance of how employers and volunteer organizations perform background checks. In this model, the attestation sequence is initiated by a Relying Party. The Attester conveys Evidence to the Relying Party, which does not process its payload, but relays the message and optionally checks it's signature against a policed trust anchor store. Upon receiving the evidence the Relying Party initiates a  with the Verifier. Once session is established, it forwards the received Evidence to the Verfier. The Verifier appraises the received Evidence according to its Appraisal Policy for Evidence and returns a corresponding Attestation Result to the Relying Party. The Relying Party then checks the
+Attestation Result against its own appraisal policy.
+
+~~~~
+.----------.                                                 .----------.                            .----------.
+| Attester |                                                 | R. P.    |                            | Verifier |
+'----------'                                                 '----------'                            '----------'
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+  generateClaims(attestingEnvironment)                            |                                      |
+     | => claims, eventLogs                                       |                                      |
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+     | <-- requestAttestation(handle, authSecIDs, claimSelection) |                                      |
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+  collectClaims(claims, claimSelection)                           |                                      |
+     | => collectedClaims                                         |                                      |
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+  generateEvidence(handle, authSecIDs, collectedClaims)           |                                      |
+     | => evidence                                                |                                      |
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+     | evidence, eventLogs -------------------------------------> |                                      |
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+     |                                                            | handle, evidence, eventLogs -------> |
+     |                                                            |                                      |appraiseEvidence()
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+     |                                                            |  attestationResults <--------------- |
+     |                                                            |   (evidence, results)                |
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+     |                       appraiseResults(evidence, results)   |                                      |
+     |                                                            |                                      |
+~~~~
+
 ## Uni-Directional Remote Attestation
 
 ~~~~