Tdoc List
2018-08-27 15:16
TDoc | Title | Source | Type | For | Agenda | Avail | Treated | Decision | Wdrn | Replaced-by | Replaces |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S3‑182100 | Agenda | WG Chairman | agenda |
2Approval of Agenda and Meeting Objectives
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | |||
S3‑182101 | Report from last SA3 meeting/s | MCC | report |
4.1Approval of the report from previous SA3 meeting(s)
| Yes |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | |||
S3‑182102 | SA3 Work Plan | MCC | Work Plan |
9.1Review of work plan
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182103 | Report from last SA meeting | WG Chairman | report |
4.2Report from SA Plenary
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182104 | SA3 meeting calendar | MCC | other |
10Future Meeting Dates and Venues
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182698 | ||
S3‑182105 | Work Plan input from Rapporteurs | MCC | other |
9.2Rapporteur input on status of WID or SID
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182699 | ||
S3‑182106 | TCG progress report | InterDigital, Inc. | report | Information |
6.6TCG
| Yes |
Yes1. TCG – Highlights
• New/modified work working group
CyRes – Cyber Resistance WG. This workgroup intends to develop new technologies, promote existing best-practices, and coordinate efforts in other groups inside and outside TCG, to improve the cyber-resiliency of future platforms.
The CyRes WG will focus on:
1. Protection for code and configuration information that determine the platform capabilities.
2. Detection mechanisms for malware and deprecated or corrupted configuration data or code.
3. Recovery capabilities that can reliably patch both code and configuration in a selected device, and hence recover the device.
• Publication of new or revised deliverables (incremental changes from the status reported at SA3#91)
o TCG TMS Use Cases v2 – delayed due to GDPR compliance review, to be published September 2018
o TCG SNMP MIB for TPM-based Attestation – public review July 2018
o TCG PC Client Platform Firmware Profile – public review July 2018
o TCG Storage Interface Interactions (SIIS) – public review May 2018
o TCG SNMP MIB for TPM-based Attestation – public review May 2018
o TCG Device Identifier Composition Engine – published March 2018
2. Meetings
TCG Members Meeting in Lisbon, PT – 15-18 October 2018
TCG Members Meeting in TBD location – February 2019
MPWG meets every Thursday at 10-11 ET
TMS WG meets every Monday and Friday at 12-13 ET
CyRes WG meets every Wednesday at 11-12:30 ET
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182107 | [MCSec] 33180 R14. Examples of MC service ID shall be URI | Airbus DS SLC | CR |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182543 | ||
S3‑182108 | [MCSec] 33180 R15. Examples of MC service ID shall be URI | Airbus DS SLC | CR |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182544 | ||
S3‑182109 | New KI proposal for TR 33.861 on CIoT security | InterDigital, Inc. | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182110 | [MCSec] 33180 R14. Clarification for MIKEY-SAKKE values | Airbus DS SLC | CR |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
YesAlex (BT) commented that adding changes to editor's notes was not a valid procedure for a frozen spec, it was better to wait.
| revised | No | S3‑182545 | ||
S3‑182111 | [MCSec] 33180 R15. Clarification for MIKEY-SAKKE values | Airbus DS SLC | CR |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182546 | ||
S3‑182112 | [MCSec] 33180 R15. Clarification for MIKEY-SAKKE values | Airbus DS SLC | CR |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | |||
S3‑182113 | New KI proposal for TR 33.861 on CIoT security | InterDigital, Inc. | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182114 | New KI proposal for TR 33.861 on CIoT security | InterDigital, Inc. | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182115 | New KI proposal for TR 33.861 on CIoT security | InterDigital, Inc. | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182116 | New KI proposal for TR 33.861 on CIoT security | InterDigital, Inc. | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182117 | New KI proposal for TR 33.861 on CIoT security | InterDigital, Inc. | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182118 | Use of SCEF anchored non-IP PDN Connections with BEST | Convida Wireless, InterDigital, Inc. | discussion | Agreement |
7.4.15Battery Efficient Security for very low Throughput Machine Type Communication Devices (BEST_MTC_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182119 | Adding BEST Support for non-IP PDN Connections that Terminate at the SCEF | Convida Wireless, InterDigital, Inc. | CR | Approval |
7.4.15Battery Efficient Security for very low Throughput Machine Type Communication Devices (BEST_MTC_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182626 | |
S3‑182120 | [Draft] LS on Specification of the EAS-C/U interfaces for BEST | Convida Wireless, InterDigital, Inc. | LS out | Agreement |
7.4.15Battery Efficient Security for very low Throughput Machine Type Communication Devices (BEST_MTC_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182674 | |
S3‑182121 | Question on 5G network slices | GSMA SIM | LS in |
6.4GSMA
| Yes |
Yes
| replied to | No | |||
S3‑182122 | Reply LS on GSMA question on 5G network slices | S2-187599 | LS in |
6.4GSMA
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182123 | LS Out for 5G slices roaming | S3i180376 | LS in |
6.4GSMA
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182124 | Statement on urgency of alignment of ETSI SSP with 3GPP release 15 | GSMA | LS in |
6.4GSMA
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182125 | Reply LS on initial NAS message protection | C1-183727 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
YesThis LS was already replied in the previous meeting.
| withdrawn | Yes | |||
S3‑182126 | Reply LS on initial NAS message protection | S2-187505 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| replied to | No | |||
S3‑182127 | LS on [Temporary group call – user regroup] and [Temporary group – broadcast group call] | C1-184907 | LS in |
7.3eMCSec R16 security (MCXSec) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182128 | Provision of ngKSI to UE at EAP-Request/AKA'-Challenge | C1-184942 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| replied to | No | |||
S3‑182129 | Reply LS on AUSF/UDM instance selection and SUCI parameters | C4-184576 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182130 | Response to “Reply LS on AUSF/UDM instance selection and SUCI parameters” | C6-180361 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182131 | Reply LS to “LS on AUSF/UDM instance selection and SUCI parameters” | S2-186257 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182132 | LS OUT on TLS and inter PLMN routing | C4-184612 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182133 | LS OUT on TLS and inter PLMN routing | C4-185493 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| replied to | No | |||
S3‑182134 | LS on Nausf_SoRProtection service | C4-185319 | LS in |
7.4.14PLMN RAT selection (Steering of Roaming) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182135 | Reply LS on avoiding race condition in 5G AKA | C4-185320 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182136 | LS OUT on OAuth 2.0 | C4-185505 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| replied to | No | |||
S3‑182137 | Reply LS on SoR mechanism | C6-180295 | LS in |
7.4.14PLMN RAT selection (Steering of Roaming) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182138 | Reply-LS on new work item "X.5Gsec-q" | ETSI TC CYBER | LS in |
6.8TC-CYBER
| Yes |
YesColin (BT): if they mention 5G we shouldn't duplicate work that is being done in 3GPP as well.
| replied to | No | |||
S3‑182139 | LSout to various organisations on usage of NFV Specifications | ETSI ISG NFV | LS in |
6.9ETSI NFV security
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182140 | Reply LS to RAN2 on Bluetooth/WLAN measurement collection in MDT | S5-183626 | LS in |
6.13GPP Working Groups
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182141 | Reply LS on Bluetooth/WLAN measurement collection in MDT | R2-1808793 | LS in |
6.13GPP Working Groups
| Yes |
YesChina Mobile had a contribution related to this: tdoc 450.
| replied to | No | |||
S3‑182142 | Security related agreements on Early Data Transmission | R2-1808869 | LS in |
7.4.10Security Aspects of Narrowband IOT (CIoT)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182143 | Reply LS on Security aspects of supporting LTE connected to 5GC | R2-1809162 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| replied to | No | |||
S3‑182144 | LS on inactive security | R2-1809177 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| replied to | No | |||
S3‑182145 | LS on UE identity for PO calculation | R2-1810941 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| replied to | No | |||
S3‑182146 | LS on security requirements for RRC connection release | R2-1810960 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| replied to | No | |||
S3‑182147 | LS on connection re-establishment security | R2-1810965 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| replied to | No | |||
S3‑182148 | LS on EDT procedures and AS NAS interaction (R2-1712077) | R3-183574 | LS in |
7.4.10Security Aspects of Narrowband IOT (CIoT)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182149 | Reply LS on new BEST Service | S2-187226 | LS in |
7.4.15Battery Efficient Security for very low Throughput Machine Type Communication Devices (BEST_MTC_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182150 | LS on security handling when deploying UDSF | S2-187506 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| replied to | No | |||
S3‑182151 | Reply LS on clarification on Restricted Operator Services | S2-181407 | LS in |
8.8Study on Security Aspects of PARLOS (FS_PARLOS_Sec) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| postponed | No | |||
S3‑182152 | LS on devices behind 5G-RG accessing the 5GC | S3i180377 | LS in |
8.7Study on the security of the Wireless and Wireline Convergence for the 5G system architecture (FS_5WWC_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| postponed | No | |||
S3‑182153 | Reply LS on CAPIF4xMB | S6-180727 | LS in |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| replied to | No | |||
S3‑182154 | Reply LS on CAPIF4xMB | S6-180944 | LS in |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182155 | Reply LS to “5G for Industrial Communication” | SP-180608 | LS in |
6.10Other Groups
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182156 | LS on Guidance on Way Forward for Steering of Roaming | SP-180621 | LS in |
7.4.14PLMN RAT selection (Steering of Roaming) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182157 | UE capability related to integrity protection of DRBs | R2-1804056 | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
YesThis LS was treated already in the previous meeting.
| withdrawn | Yes | |||
S3‑182158 | New KI proposal for TR 33.807 on security of the Wireless and Wireline Convergence for the 5G system architecture | InterDigital, Inc. | pCR | Approval |
8.7Study on the security of the Wireless and Wireline Convergence for the 5G system architecture (FS_5WWC_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182159 | LS/r on revised Recommendation ITU-T Q.850 (reply to 3GPP TSG SA3 - C3-183507) | ITU-T SG11 | LS in |
6.10Other Groups
| Yes |
YesThis LS was intended for CT3.
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182160 | Reply LS on temporary group regroup procedures | S6-181287 | LS in |
7.3eMCSec R16 security (MCXSec) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182161 | LS on use of ITS dedicated spectrum within V2X UE | S6-181288 | LS in |
6.13GPP Working Groups
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182162 | Reply LS on CAPIF specification work in SA3 | S6-181290 | LS in |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182163 | LS on application layer support for V2X services | S6-181291 | LS in |
6.13GPP Working Groups
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182164 | Protection of the N4 Interface | Juniper Networks, Deutsche Telecom AG | CR |
7.1.12NDS
| Yes |
YesEricsson: Do we need to specify separately the security for every core network/RAN interface? We should do it in a more generic way.
ORANGE: this is in line with what SA2 is doing.
It was agreed to create a new CR to do such generalization.
| not pursued | No | |||
S3‑182165 | Protection of the N9 Interface | Juniper Networks, Deutsche Telecom AG | CR |
7.1.12NDS
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | |||
S3‑182166 | Discussion on the Scope and Future Use of the NDS IP and AF Specifications | Juniper Networks | discussion |
7.4.3Network Domain Security (NDS)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182167 | Update NDS/IP scope with application layer crypto profiles | Juniper Networks | CR |
7.4.3Network Domain Security (NDS)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182606 | ||
S3‑182168 | Update NDS/IP scope with application layer crypto profiles | Juniper Networks | CR |
7.4.3Network Domain Security (NDS)
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | |||
S3‑182169 | Clarify NDS/AF intro regarding crypto profiles | Juniper Networks | CR |
7.4.3Network Domain Security (NDS)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182608 | ||
S3‑182170 | Clarify NDS/AF intro regarding crypto profiles | Juniper Networks | CR |
7.4.3Network Domain Security (NDS)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182171 | Clause 5.2.5 - Modification on subscriber privacy | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.14Privacy
| Yes |
YesIDEMIA: we cannot mandate proprietary schemes to be stored in the USIM. Ericsson agreed.
Gemalto: the routing information should be listed as well.
| revised | No | S3‑182635 | |
S3‑182172 | Clause 5.8.2 - Modification on requirement on UDM storing key pair identifier | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.14Privacy
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182173 | Clause 5.9.3.3 - Modification on integrity requirement on N32 | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
YesDT didn’t agree with this change; it is not modified inline.NCSC agreed.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182174 | Clause 6.1.2 - Modification on figure of initiation of authentication | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
YesEricsson didn’t see the need to have a split in the fgure.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182175 | Clause 6.3.1 - Modification on security context handling | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.6Security context
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182540 | |
S3‑182176 | Discussion on AMF sending NAS SMC over both access types | ZTE Corporation | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182177 | Clause 6.4.2.2 - Clarification on AMF sending NAS SMC over both access types | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182178 | Clause 6.4.5 - Editorial modification on NAS COUNT handling | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182179 | Clause 6.6.1 - Modification on UP security policy | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182644 | |
S3‑182180 | Clause 6.6.2 - Modification on UP security activation mechanism | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesHuawei supported this change. Nokia had some reservations since they considered it a rare case.They dropped their objection since everybody else could live with the change.
| revised | No | S3‑182645 | |
S3‑182181 | Clause 6.7.3.2 - Modification on algorithm selection during N2 handover | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182584 | |
S3‑182182 | Clause 6.7.3.5 - Correct reference for RNA update procedure | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182183 | Clause 6.8.2.1.3 - Modification on State transition from RRC-INACTIVE to RRC-CONNECTED | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182184 | Clause 6.9.2 - Modification on security handling during handover | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
YesEricsson: Note1 in 6.2.9.3.3 is important to be kept here, not removed as proposed by ZTE.
Docomo: if it's important it should be normative and not an informative note.
| revised | No | S3‑182585 | |
S3‑182185 | Clause 6.9.2.1.2, 6.9.2.2 - Editorial modification on NAS during handover | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
YesEricsson commented that removing 6.9.2.2 was not possible since it is a stand alone procedure.They didn’t agree with the other changes either, since they were removing details that were important.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182186 | Clause 6.9.3 - Editorial modification on mobile registration update – AMF handling | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
YesEricsson: leave out any aspect on Multi NAS until we have finished discussions.
| merged | No | S3‑182636 | |
S3‑182187 | Discussion on mobile registration update | ZTE Corporation | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
YesNokia didn’t see a problem. The agreements in Belgrade were enough for them.
Ericsson (tdoc 419) and Qualcomm (tdoc 482) agreed on the existence of an issue and they had contributions with possible solutions.
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182188 | Clause 6.9.3 - Add multi-NAS connections consideration for mobile registration update – AMF handling | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182189 | Clause 6.9.3, 6.3.2.2 - Modification on mobile registration update – UE handling | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182190 | Discussion on key change indication on N14 (AMF-AMF) | ZTE Corporation | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
YesEricsson: AKSI is the wrong terminology. They didn't agree with the proposals as it has fundamental errors.
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182191 | Clause 6.9.2.3.3 - Correct indication on N14 during N2 HO | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182585 | |
S3‑182192 | Clause 6.9.3 - Add description for mobile registration update when NAS SMC has been performed – AMF handling | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182193 | Clause 6.9.5.1 - Add rule for concurrent running of security procedures | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
YesEricsson: rule three is not needed.It was agreed to be removed.
There was an overlap with rule 6 with the contribution 478 from Qualcomm. It was agreed to integrate it here.
| revised | No | S3‑182655 | |
S3‑182194 | Clause 6.9.5.2 - Modify rule for concurrent running of security procedures | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
YesOverlap with 410 and 479, that simply remove bullet 4.
| revised | No | S3‑182656 | |
S3‑182195 | Discussion on RRC Reestablishment security | ZTE Corporation | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182196 | Report from last SA3 meeting/s | MCC | report |
4.1Approval of the report from previous SA3 meeting(s)
| Yes |
YesNCSC's action item stays open.
| approved | No | |||
S3‑182197 | Removal of JWE/JWS profile from 33.501 | Ericsson | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
YesMCC warned about renaming clauses and moving content around. The clauses should be voided and the new content added to a new clause.
| merged | No | S3‑182550 | |
S3‑182198 | JWE and JWS profiles | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.4.3Network Domain Security (NDS)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182606 | |
S3‑182199 | CR to clarify username in Annex C | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Approval |
7.1.2Key derivation
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182583 | |
S3‑182200 | Deletion of Requester ID from ‘Nausf_UEAuthentication_authenticate’ | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182201 | CR to Clause 6.9.3 Removal of KSEAF storage restriction | Nokia, Verizon, TMO-USA,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Approval |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182548 | |
S3‑182202 | CR for Addition of security requirements for external storage | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai bell, Verizon, TMO-USA | CR |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
YesDocomo: relying on an unespecified interface is a bit messy.Replace with a "shall" and reword to make the requirement clearer.
This clause was controversial and Nokia preferred to withdraw it. Docomo wanted to at least approve a few sentences and work from there from the next meeting.
Docomo proposed to postpone the decision to the next meeting, bringing the same CR for discussion. MCC clarified that if postponed, no revisions of the content would be possible.
| revised | No | S3‑182549 | ||
S3‑182203 | Clause 6.9.3 typo corrections | Nokia, Nokia shanghai Bell | CR | Approval |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182636 | |
S3‑182204 | Make DTLS optional on F1, E1, N2, Xn interfaces | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell, Huawei, HiSilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesBT: This is making IPSec optional as well in 9.8.3.
Ericsson didn't agree with making it optional.Huawei supported Ericsson.
ORANGE: we had long discussions to make this mandatory. No point to reverse this.
Huawei: there are technical arguments behind this.
Docomo: A "may" be supported complicates inter operability for operators.
Ericsson: DTLS is for the protection of the applications that are using SCTP. This is what is stated in the RFC.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182205 | CR to delete ENs in clause 5.3 gNB Requirements | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182651 | |
S3‑182206 | CR to align NAS Connection value and access type | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182207 | Correct confidentiality key in confidentiality clause. | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182208 | Delete EN in Annex D for parameters | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai bell | CR | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182209 | Define and clarify ABBA parameter | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182653 | |
S3‑182210 | Key issue avoiding AS encryption for application security enabled UE | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182211 | Key issue providing temperory security for PARLOS PDU session | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai bell | pCR | Approval |
8.8Study on Security Aspects of PARLOS (FS_PARLOS_Sec) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182212 | SID on Enhanced network Slicing | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell,NEC, Huawei, HiSilicon,Motorola Mobility, Lenovo | SID new | Approval |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
YesHuawei: less about network slicing than it is stated.
ZTE: network slice security belongs to phase two.
The Chair commented that this was coming from an agreement from last meeting.
China Mobile: we need to clarify the authentication in the network slice context. We have a discussion paper about this in 449. From this document it was preffered to go for cat 3.
ORANGE commented that SA2 had ths in their study.
Ericsson: the last bullet is a bit out of scope of this SID, it should belong to another SID. Vodafone agreed.
Qualcomm: inter-slice security isolation? Where is this defined?ORANGE and Gemalto wanted to keep this bullet.
Huawei: add privacy issues.
ORANGE: privacy is in our terms of reference. We always take it into account. Interidigital: all security issues are part of the ToR.
| revised | No | S3‑182665 | |
S3‑182213 | Delete EN in Clause 10.2.1 Authenticated IMS Emergency Sessions | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182214 | Discussion paper on S3-182150 KSEAF storage in UDSF | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182215 | draft_Reply LS to S3-182150 security handling when deploying UDSF | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | LS out |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182547 | ||
S3‑182216 | [CAPIF_Sec] 33122 R15 access token profile | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182620 | |
S3‑182217 | [CAPIF-Sec] 33122 R15 FC values for CAPIF | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182218 | [CAPIF-Sec] 33122 correct note in clause 6.5.2.1 | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182622 | |
S3‑182219 | [CAPIF-Sec] 33220 R15 FC values for CAPIF | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182220 | [MCPTT] 33179 R13 Fix XML schema | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182221 | [MCSec] 33180 R14 Fix XML schema | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182222 | [MCPTT] 33180 R15 Fix XML schema (mirror) | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182601 | |
S3‑182223 | [MCSec] 33180 R14 FC values for MCData | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182224 | [MCSec] 33180 R15 FC values for MCData (mirror) | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182225 | [MCSec] 33180 R15 registered media type | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182226 | [MCSec] 33220 R14 FC values for MCData | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182227 | [MCSec] 33220 R15 FC values for MCData (mirror) | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182228 | Clause 6.12.2-Adding Routing Indicator in SUCI | CATT, Ericsson , Vodafone, Huawei, NEC, China Mobile, Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell Labs, IDEMIA | CR | Agreement |
7.1.14Privacy
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182513 | |
S3‑182229 | Clarification on UP security policy verification | CATT | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182644 | |
S3‑182230 | Clarifications on AS key update for non-3GPP access | CATT | CR | Agreement |
7.1.11non-3GPP access
| Yes |
YesQualcomm: we don’t want to do reauthentication in this scenario, no security reasons.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182231 | Clarifications on handover handling for Dual Connectivity | CATT | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesDefinition part will go into S3-182648.The rest goes to 649.
| merged | No | S3‑182649 | |
S3‑182232 | Clarifications on the key lifetime for non-3GPP access | CATT | CR | Agreement |
7.1.11non-3GPP access
| Yes |
YesNokia,Qualcomm: the new text is confusing.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182233 | Reference corrections in clause 6.10 | CATT | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182234 | Resolving Editor’s Notes for requirements on the gNB | CATT | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182651 | |
S3‑182235 | Key issue proposal for FS_CIoT_sec_5G | NEC Corporation | pCR | Agreement |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182236 | Removal of comment texts | NEC Corporation | CR | Agreement |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182237 | Algorithm Negotiation for Unauthenticated UEs in LSM | Huawei, HiSilicon, China Mobile | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182646 | |
S3‑182238 | Update Key handling at RRC-INACTIVE state transitions | Huawei, HiSilicon, Intel, China Mobile | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182639 | |
S3‑182239 | Supporting DTLS on gNB internal and external SCTP Interfaces | Huawei, Hisilicon, Nokia | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.12NDS
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182516 | |
S3‑182240 | AS SMC Handling Update | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182241 | DRAFT Reply LS on RRC Re-establishment security | Huawei, Hisilicon | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182541 | |
S3‑182242 | Discussion on RRC Re-establishment Security | Huawei, Hisilicon | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182243 | DRAFT Reply LS on security requirements for RRC connection release | Huawei, Hisilicon, China Mobile | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesEricsson didn’t want to remove this feature and leave it up to RAN2 whether they want t use it.
Nokia: we have established in the LTE TS that all redirection shall be protected. We don’t need another network policy for this case.
Docomo: how do we know if there's an impact on the service from the UE side?
| revised | No | S3‑182542 | |
S3‑182244 | Study of 5G System Security Phase-2 | Huawei, Hisilicon, | SID new | Approval |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182625 | |
S3‑182245 | DRAFT LS on SCTP Restrictions when supporting DTLS over SCTP | Huawei, Hisilicon | LS out | Approval |
7.1.12NDS
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182246 | pCR to TR33.861: Authentication of a group of CIoT devices | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182247 | pCR to TR33.861: Secure Communication for a group CIoT devices | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182248 | Key Issue on gNB Protection from CIoT DoS attack | Huawei, Hisilicon, China Mobile | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182249 | Study on 5G security enhancement | Apple Computer Trading Co. Ltd | SID new | Approval |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
YesORANGE: privacy was covered in 5G phase one already.
Interdigital: during fake base station attack, identifiers can be leaked.
NCSC: these studies seem to affect only the UE, are studying impact on the core? Apple replied that the core was covered.
T-Mobile: overlap with the Huawei SID.
The Chair commented that there had been a privacy study item in the past whose results were not satisfactory.
ORANGE proposed some rewording regarding privacy. The objectives were also simplified.
Ericsson: giving a handbook of threats to 5G is giving a bad image. Let's focus on solutions and not study the threats.
Ericsson commented that there was agreement on having focused studies and that they could come back in the next meeting with the different studies. Discussing the content during the present meeting would be time consuming. Huawei agreed.
| revised | No | S3‑182634 | |
S3‑182250 | New WID on Security of the enhancement to the 5GC location services | CATT | SID new | Agreement |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
YesORANGE: some statements are normative.
Qualcomm: in SA2 they consider translating what we have in LTE in the 5G system. Security threats are not clear. We don’t think that this is SID is needed. A SID could be needed depending on RAN's work such as broadcast aspects.
Ericsson: we should take a look at any work that SA2 is doing.We support this SID with a simplified objective.
| revised | No | S3‑182678 | |
S3‑182251 | Performance aspects for the new 256-bit algorithms | CATT | pCR | Approval |
8.3Study on Supporting 256-bit Algorithms for 5G (FS_256-Algorithms) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182537 | |
S3‑182252 | Proposed Skeleton for TR | SPRINT Corporation | draft TR | Agreement |
8.8Study on Security Aspects of PARLOS (FS_PARLOS_Sec) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182253 | P-CR proposing Background clause text | SPRINT Corporation | pCR | Agreement |
8.8Study on Security Aspects of PARLOS (FS_PARLOS_Sec) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182254 | P-CR proposing Introduction clause text | SPRINT Corporation | pCR | Agreement |
8.8Study on Security Aspects of PARLOS (FS_PARLOS_Sec) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182255 | P-CR proposing Scope clause text | SPRINT Corporation | pCR | Agreement |
8.8Study on Security Aspects of PARLOS (FS_PARLOS_Sec) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182256 | P-CR proposing Requirements, assumptions and constraint clause text | SPRINT Corporation | pCR | Agreement |
8.8Study on Security Aspects of PARLOS (FS_PARLOS_Sec) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182257 | JOSE based protection of messages over N32-f | Nokia, NCSC,Nokia Shanghai Bell | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182560 | |
S3‑182258 | Remove EN in 13.2 – Application layer security | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182673 | |
S3‑182259 | Exchange of N32-f context id during Initial Handshake | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182673 | |
S3‑182260 | Other Security Procedures for Dual Connectivity | Huawei, HiSilicon | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182649 | |
S3‑182261 | Key issue on keys used in GBA | Huawei, HiSilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182262 | Key issue for fitting GBA into 5G core network functions | Huawei, HiSilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182263 | Key issue on DoS attack on the network for CIoT | Huawei, HiSilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182264 | Key issue on security for small data transmission | Huawei, HiSilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182265 | The SID on security for 5G URLLC | Huawei, HiSilicon | SID new | Approval |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
YesQualcomm: we have seen this before and rejected it. What's new?
Huawei: SA2's progressed and they have security issues that need to be taken into account here.
Vodafone: we would trigger this SID with an LS from SA2.
Docomo: we should start working on our own and not wait for SA2 to start any kind of work. A discussion paper would have been helpful to explain to us what the issues are instead of "security issues were detected". Qualcomm supported this.
ORANGE also wanted a discussion paper on what SA2 is doing and the security issues that are identified in their work.
Interdigital: asking SA2 for the security issues? That's our job.
Huawei clarified that SA2 would finish their study in September.
| revised | No | S3‑182679 | |
S3‑182266 | Discussion-slice-management-security | Huawei, HiSilicon, China Mobile, China Unicom, CATR, CATT | discussion | Endorsement |
7.5New Work Item proposals
| Yes |
YesORANGE didn’t see the need to have a WID on this topic.
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182267 | WID slicing management security | Huawei, HiSilicon, China Mobile, China Unicom, CATR, CATT | WID new | Approval |
7.5New Work Item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182268 | Draft LS to GSMA on slicing | Huawei, HiSilicon | LS out | Approval |
6.4GSMA
| Yes |
YesQualcomm: we don’t need to ask them whether we need a slice specific authentication.
ORANGE: there's no link between the DN and the slice. The secondary authentication is not linked to the NSSAI.
Ericsson: keep it simple by confirming SA2's reply.
| revised | No | S3‑182530 | |
S3‑182269 | Amendment to Re-authentication procedure in Secondary Authentication | Huawei, HiSilicon | CR | Agreement |
7.1.9Secondary authentication
| Yes |
YesORANGE: not consistent with what SA2 has in their specification.
Huawei commented that was the reason why they were proposing an LS to SA2 where they should add this change.The procedure was broken according to them.
ORANGE commented that SA3 was not the right place to discuss this but in SA2.
Ericsson: let's ask SA2 with an LS if there is a problem.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182270 | Draft-LS-out-to-SA2-on secondary re-authentication | Huawei, HiSilicon | LS out | Approval |
7.1.9Secondary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182661 | |
S3‑182271 | Presentation on N32 connections and N32-f context | Nokia, Juniper,Nokia Shanghai Bell | other | Presentation |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182272 | CR to add N32 definitions | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182550 | |
S3‑182273 | CR to add a missing step to discover an NF producer instance during Access Token Request | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182641 | |
S3‑182274 | CR to add Access Token Request procedure for a specific NF service producer | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182642 | |
S3‑182275 | Security requirements for API invoker onboarding and offboarding | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182618 | |
S3‑182276 | Modifications on Security procedures for API invoker onboarding | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182610 | |
S3‑182277 | Clarification on Security protections in CAPIF-1 and CAPIF-2 reference point | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
YesNEC ommented that it's up to the operator to appy security protection, in the first change. This was taken offline.
| revised | No | S3‑182619 | |
S3‑182278 | Clarification on access token verification | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182621 | |
S3‑182279 | Editorial corrections to TS 33.501 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
YesORANGE: do we need Note 9 in the definition?
Vodafone disagreed with the note as well.
NOTE 2 was brought back as the change was argued by NEC.
| revised | No | S3‑182657 | |
S3‑182280 | FC value in TS 33.220 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182623 | |
S3‑182281 | Adding FC value to TS 33.122 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182624 | |
S3‑182282 | Access token profile | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
YesMotorola commented that the whole access token was to be defined in the annex, so this was needed.It was agreed to reword it.
| merged | No | S3‑182620 | |
S3‑182283 | Key Issue on mutual authentication between UE and BSF | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182284 | Corrections on primary authentication | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
YesThe addition in bullet 5 wasn't fully understood.
| revised | No | S3‑182658 | |
S3‑182285 | Delay the transmission of kseaf after home network verifies the RES_star | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182286 | editorial modification on TR33.856 | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182693 | |
S3‑182287 | Dicussion on security handling when deploying UDSF | Huawei, Hisilicon | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.6Security context
| Yes |
YesIntel:we should not be implementation specific.
Docomo: Is it necessary to have KSEAF stored anywhere in Rel-15? It's not clear to me why they need to store it.
Ericsson proposed to remove the requirement on the storage. It was confusing for SA2.
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182288 | evaluation of solution 1.1 for KI#1 | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
YesORANGE: remove "basis of normative work".
| revised | No | S3‑182687 | |
S3‑182289 | a proposal for the key issue on protecting the SRVCC capability of TR33.856 | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
YesEricsson didn’t agree with this scenario.
Huawei commented that this scenario was coming from SA2.
Nokia agreed with Ericsson. They didn’t agree with this key issue.
Qualcomm agreed with this key issue.
| revised | No | S3‑182684 | |
S3‑182290 | a proposal for protecting the SRVCC capability of TR33.856 | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182686 | |
S3‑182291 | conclusion for key issue on protecting the SRVCC capability in initial NAS message | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
YesHuawei: SA2 has concluded on this issue.
ORANGE: has SA2 decided to go for normative work?
Huawei replied that they have an existing WID.
| revised | No | S3‑182691 | |
S3‑182292 | Discussion on initial NAS message Protection Solution | Huawei, Hisilicon | discussion | Discussion |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182293 | Delete initial NAS message protection solution | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
YesQualcomm didn't agree wih the removal.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182294 | LS on INACTIVE Security Algorithms Negotiation | Huawei, Hisilicon | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182295 | Security Algorithms Negotiation for INACTIVE related procedures | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesEricsson: this was brought earlier and it wasn’t agreed.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182296 | Involve Fresh Parameters to Input of InactiveMAC-I to Avoid Replay Attack | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182297 | Discussion on input for InactiveMAC-I to avoid replay attack | Huawei, Hisilicon | discussion | Discussion |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182298 | Alignment of terminology in RRCConnctionReestablsihment Procedure in R14 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.1SAE/LTE Security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182602 | |
S3‑182299 | Alignment of terminology in RRCConnctionReestablsihment Procedure in R15 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.1SAE/LTE Security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182603 | |
S3‑182300 | Key Issue on IoT Terminal Security Monitoring | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182301 | Align AS SMC procedure with SA2 and RAN3 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesQualcomm, Ericsson: content is OK but the location is not correct.
It was agreed to change this in order to just show a reference to the relevant TS.
Nokia didn’t agree with the last paragraph of the change.
| revised | No | S3‑182650 | |
S3‑182302 | Hanldling UP security policy in MRDC | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182303 | skeleton of TS 33511 | Huawei, Hisilicon | draft TS | Approval |
7.2.1NR Node B (gNB) (TS 33.511)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182304 | scope of TS 33511 | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
7.2.1NR Node B (gNB) (TS 33.511)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182305 | security requirements and corresponding test cases for gNB | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
7.2.1NR Node B (gNB) (TS 33.511)
| Yes |
YesNEC: some requirements are internal to the product and not possible to test. E.g. 4.2.2.1.Z.
Huawei commented that this was following the same pattern as the SCAS for eNodeB.
Nokia didn’t agree with this pCR.
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182306 | skeleton of TS 33515 | Huawei, Hisilicon | draft TS | Approval |
7.2.5Session Management Function (SMF) (TS 33.515)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182599 | |
S3‑182307 | scope of TS 33515 | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
7.2.5Session Management Function (SMF) (TS 33.515)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182308 | EDCE5 security requirements and corresponding test cases for MeNB | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.9Security Assurance Specifications (SCAS-SA3, SCAS_PGW, SCAS_eNB)
| Yes |
YesNEC: 4.2.2.1.E is too detailed.
Nokia had also some issues that had to be taken offline.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182309 | skeleton of TR 33807 | Huawei, Hisilicon | draft TR | Approval |
8.7Study on the security of the Wireless and Wireline Convergence for the 5G system architecture (FS_5WWC_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182310 | scope of TR33807 | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.7Study on the security of the Wireless and Wireline Convergence for the 5G system architecture (FS_5WWC_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182311 | new requirement of 5G RG | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.7Study on the security of the Wireless and Wireline Convergence for the 5G system architecture (FS_5WWC_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182312 | new requirement of NAS security | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.7Study on the security of the Wireless and Wireline Convergence for the 5G system architecture (FS_5WWC_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182313 | new requirement of multi NAS connection | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.7Study on the security of the Wireless and Wireline Convergence for the 5G system architecture (FS_5WWC_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182314 | new requirement of UP security | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.7Study on the security of the Wireless and Wireline Convergence for the 5G system architecture (FS_5WWC_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182315 | new requirement of truted access | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.7Study on the security of the Wireless and Wireline Convergence for the 5G system architecture (FS_5WWC_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182316 | Clarifications in TS 33117 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.9Security Assurance Specifications (SCAS-SA3, SCAS_PGW, SCAS_eNB)
| Yes |
YesEricsson didn’t agree with the second change, since it was ambiguous. Leaving the door open
NEC didn’t agree with the editor's note. Huawei agreed to remove it but they noted that the issue was still open.
MCC commented that this CR would need to correct the issue in lower releases.
| revised | No | S3‑182612 | |
S3‑182317 | CR on mandatory ciphering of access tokens by NRF in inter-PLMN scenarios | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
YesEricsson commented that this was not needed (Cyphering with a token).
NCSC: more work is needed in the reference to the document [45] that is about sing-in.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182318 | CR to remove Editor’s Note on additional claims in the access token | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
YesHuawei didn't agree with removing the scope. Nokia agreed with putting it back.
| revised | No | S3‑182566 | |
S3‑182319 | CR to remove Editor’s Note on additional parameters that may be required in step 1 of Figure 13.4.1.1-2 | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182567 | |
S3‑182320 | CR to remove Editor’s Note on verification of claims in the access token | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182568 | |
S3‑182321 | pCR to DraftCR - Protection Policies | KPN N.V. | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
YesDocomo: "Which IPX providers are authorized to perform modifications" not required if we don’t have a next hop. Delete this line.If we have a next hop identifier this is not required.
It was commented that KPN was not present in the meeting to agree on the changes. DT proposed to take this over.
| revised | No | S3‑182555 | |
S3‑182322 | For Information: Discussion document on dealing with maliciously behaving devices | KPN N.V. | discussion | Information |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182323 | For Information: Potential new key issue | KPN N.V. | other | Information |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182324 | For Information: A potential new solution for dealing with maliciously behaving devices | KPN N.V. | other | Information |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182325 | Session Key Derivation for N32-f Application Layer Security | NCSC | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182553 | |
S3‑182326 | Agenda and notes of SA3 conference call on remaining Rel-15 SBA work | Deutsche Telekom AG | discussion | Information |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182327 | Agenda and notes of CT4/SA3 conference call on N32 | Deutsche Telekom AG | discussion | Information |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182328 | Agenda and notes of SA3 conference call on N32 | Deutsche Telekom AG | discussion | Information |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182329 | CR-slice-management-security | Huawei, HiSilicon, China Mobile, China Unicom, CATR, CATT | CR |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
YesColin (BT) asked whether it was about management of network slices as signalling.
MCC queried whether network slicing management security was part of the objectives of the 5G phase one security WID. ORANGE commented that it was part of the objectives of this WID to work on 5G security issues that were being done in other working groups (SA5 in this case). MCC commented that it may be argued that a revised WID for 5G Phase one would be needed to add this or a new WID to add this new security feature. The CR was finally agreed.
| agreed | No | |||
S3‑182330 | SBA Security in the Context of 5G SCAS Work | Deutsche Telekom AG, Nokia | discussion | Endorsement |
7.4.9Security Assurance Specifications (SCAS-SA3, SCAS_PGW, SCAS_eNB)
| Yes |
Yes
| endorsed | No | ||
S3‑182331 | Document Skeleton for TS 33.512, based on TS 33.116 | Deutsche Telekom AG | draft TS | Approval |
7.4.9Security Assurance Specifications (SCAS-SA3, SCAS_PGW, SCAS_eNB)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182594 | |
S3‑182332 | Update to WID 5G SCAS | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell, Huawei, HiSilicon, China Unicom, CATT, Deutsche Telekom, ZTE, Samsung, KPN, NEC, British Telecom, China Mobile | WID revised | Approval |
7.2.1NR Node B (gNB) (TS 33.511)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182525 | |
S3‑182333 | Discussion on Security Assurance for 3GPP Virtualized Network Products | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell, China Mobile | discussion | Endorsement |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182334 | New WID on security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to 3G | China Unicom, Huawei, HiSilicon, ZTE, CATT, OPPO | WID new |
7.5New Work Item proposals
| Yes |
YesAlex(BT): in 5G we rely on VoLTE. Scenarios 2 and 3 are unclear since I don’t know what we are standardising.
ORANGE commented that the current percentage of completion of the study (50%) may not justify this work item.
Ericsson asked about the status of the study in SA2. It was commented that SA2 hadn’t completed the study yet.
| revised | No | S3‑182671 | ||
S3‑182335 | On the alignment of N32 terminology | Deutsche Telekom AG, Juniper Networks Inc. | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182336 | Evaluation for solution #1.1 | China Unicom | pCR |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
YesEricsson: the parameter is not new.
| revised | No | S3‑182688 | ||
S3‑182337 | Closing the open Action Item for implementing one NESAS Pilot Finding in SCAS specification | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | discussion | Endorsement |
7.4.9Security Assurance Specifications (SCAS-SA3, SCAS_PGW, SCAS_eNB)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182338 | Evaluation for solution #1.2 | China Unicom | pCR |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
YesEricsson: keep the evaluation but the last sentence seems not to be aligned with SA2.
| revised | No | S3‑182689 | ||
S3‑182339 | A scenario on secure communication for shared bikes | Alibaba (China) Group., Ltd. | pCR | Approval |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182518 | |
S3‑182340 | References to encrypted IEs in the rewritten HTTP message | Ericsson | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182341 | N32-f context | Ericsson | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182552 | |
S3‑182342 | Message flows including SEPP | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182343 | Authentication for token-based authorization | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182344 | Clarifications and editorials to clause 13.1 (Transport security for service based interfaces) | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182345 | Clarifications and editorials to clause 13.3 (authentication and static authorization between network functions) | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182569 | |
S3‑182346 | Update to LS on Implementation of NESAS Pilot Findings in SCAS specifications | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | LS out | Approval |
7.4.9Security Assurance Specifications (SCAS-SA3, SCAS_PGW, SCAS_eNB)
| Yes |
YesHuawei didn't agree with the second paragraph.
| revised | No | S3‑182701 | |
S3‑182347 | Evaluation for solution #1.3 | China Unicom | pCR |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182690 | ||
S3‑182348 | EDCE5 – Fixing contradicting and insecure scg/sk counter handling in 33.401 from 36.331 | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.4.11EPC enhancements to support 5G New Radio via Dual Connectivity (EDCE5)
| Yes |
YesNokia didn't agree with this. Stick to one counter; RAN2 is wrong, so we need to tell them with an LS (S3-182616).
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182349 | LTE EDT - Updates in suspend/resume | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.4.1SAE/LTE Security
| Yes |
YesHuawei: RAN2 has gone already gone for 16 bits so let's move on.
Ericsson: this is a new feature; I don’t understand why this is not integrity protected.
This document was taken offline.It was decided to send an LS to RAN2 as well (S3-182605).
| revised | No | S3‑182604 | |
S3‑182350 | DC - definition corrections | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182648 | |
S3‑182351 | Handling of maximum supported data rate per UE for integrity protection of DRBs | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesHuawei: policing the rate is causing an unnecessary burden on the gNB.(on the sentence "if the UE indicates 64 kbps as its maximum data rate, then the network turns on the integrity protection for user plane data only for total data rates equal to or lower than 64 kbps. ").
Nokia: nothing new here, SA2 has captured it already.
It was decided to drop this given that it was captured already in SA2.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182352 | DC - integrity protection of traffic between UE and SN | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesHuawei and Qualcomm didn’t agree with this change.
Ericsson: Removing this assumes that the ng-eNB is not supporting integrity protection.
Vodafone supported this change.
Docomo: all dual connectivity types have no integrity protection supported? It was answered yes.
It was also clarified that in pure 5G gNB-gNB there is integrity protection.
DT also supported the notion of this change, but they commented that thing should be normative and not go into a note.
Qualcomm: dual connectivity where one RAN is LTE and the other is NR, we don’t support integrity protection. This was the agreement during the last meeting.
Ericsson eventually dropped this proposal and commented that they would come back with a modified proposal based on this.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182353 | DC - adding missing details | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182649 | |
S3‑182354 | Reply LS on inactive security | Ericsson | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182640 | |
S3‑182355 | Reply LS on connection re-establishment security | Ericsson | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesSamsung: if we go for the LTE solution the message is not encrypted.
Huawei: RAN2 is fine with the first message not being encrypted.
Nokia: introducing this new complexity does not bring a noticeable benefit.
The Chair noted that there was a big support for keeping the LTE mechanism.
Huawei advocated for the existing solution in TS 33.501 and communicate it to RAN2.
| merged | No | S3‑182541 | |
S3‑182356 | DC - Handling of UP security policy in SN | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182357 | DC - Selection of SN | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182358 | Reply LS on BL/WLAN measurement collection in MDT | Ericsson | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesInterdigital: spoofing of the SSID should be addressed as well.
| revised | No | S3‑182529 | |
S3‑182359 | Reply LS on UE identity for PO calculation | Ericsson | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182539 | |
S3‑182360 | Reply LS on security requirements for RRC connection release | Ericsson | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182542 | |
S3‑182361 | Reply LS on Security aspects of supporting LTE connected to 5GC | Ericsson | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182538 | |
S3‑182362 | DC – correcting reference | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182363 | Mobility – Clarification in intra-gNB-CU handover | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
YesHuawei: Meaning of intra gNB handover is not to be explained by SA3.
It had to be check offline whether the Intra gNB CU Handover existed in other groups specifications.
Ericsson: we don’t need to distinguish between intra gNB and CU handover. We need to generalise it for just Intra gNB.
| revised | No | S3‑182666 | |
S3‑182364 | Mobility – Correcting AS re-keying and NAS re-keying in N2-handover | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
YesZTE: this will make CT4 to change terminology.
Ericsson: we are not introducing a new flag, this was existing already.
| merged | No | S3‑182585 | |
S3‑182365 | Mobility – Correcting to UE handling clause | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
YesDiscussed together with 483.
| merged | No | S3‑182590 | |
S3‑182366 | Mobility – Resolving EN and corrections in AS re-keying | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182591 | |
S3‑182367 | Mobility – Corrections for usage of local policy at AMF | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182636 | |
S3‑182368 | Mobility – Rectification of NAS MAC calculation for NAS Container | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182586 | |
S3‑182369 | Mobility – Rectification of how DL NAS COUNT is transferred in NAS Container | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
YesQualcomm: CT1 has chosen 8 LSB already.
Ericsson: this just brings clarification.
This had to be checked offline.
Since an LS to CT1 was agreed to be sent, Ericsson decided to drop this revision.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182370 | Mobility – Correction of NAS COUNTs in N2-handover | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182371 | Mobility – Removing an EN in Xn-handover | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182372 | Mobility – Rectification of UE security capabilities in NAS Container | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182373 | Mobility – Rectification of how UL NAS COUNT is transferred in NAS SMC | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182638 | |
S3‑182374 | Privacy – adding missing detials in SUCI content and format | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.14Privacy
| Yes |
YesQualcomm agreed with using 4 bits instead of 8 as proposed by Huawei in tdoc 514.
Qualcomm: using the routing identifier bits is optional. It was agreed to have a field for the routing id.
ORANGE: define a default value that means "not used".
Huawei: not SA3's work, but CT4's.
| revised | No | S3‑182535 | |
S3‑182375 | Privacy - addressing ENs | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.14Privacy
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182571 | |
S3‑182376 | Update of definition of 5G AS security context for 3GPP access | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182652 | |
S3‑182377 | Use the old KRRCint for calculation of the security token in MSG3 | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182639 | |
S3‑182378 | Security enhancements in LTE | Ericsson | discussion | Endorsement |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182379 | Security enhancements in 5G | Ericsson | discussion | Endorsement |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
YesQualcomm: we cannot limit to these two points.
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182380 | N32 session key derivation and key hierarchy | Ericsson | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182553 | |
S3‑182381 | Removal of MAC based OAuth2.0 token verification | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
YesChina Mobile and Huawei didn’t agree with the change.
Vodafone: we may have different security levels considering that we have concepts like Edge Computing.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182382 | OAuth Client Registration up to implementation | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
YesORANGE didn’t like to remove the reference to the SA2 document. No reason to make it implementation specific.DT supported this.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182383 | Removal of token validation by NRF | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182568 | |
S3‑182384 | NRF Access Token Service | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182641 | |
S3‑182385 | Clarifications on OAuth access token scope | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182641 | |
S3‑182386 | TLS export | Ericsson | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182554 | |
S3‑182387 | N32 terminology and restructuring | Ericsson | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182551 | |
S3‑182388 | HTTP basic authentication to NRF | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
YesDT: if we use dummy values why do we authenticate at all? We need to consult CT4 about it.
Huawei didn't agree with this either.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182389 | NF Instance ID in HTTP basic authentication username in Rel-15 | Ericsson | discussion | Discussion |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182390 | Message Routing in N32 | Ericsson | discussion | Discussion |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
YesHuawei didn’t agree with these proposals.
It was agreed to send an LS to CT4.
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182391 | Propose the content of conclusions | China Unicom | pCR |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
YesAlex (BT): if this is the conclusion the TR misses the condition from SA plenary that moving down to UMTS would not cause any impact on 5G.
Huawei: this is the conclusion of the key issues only.
It was agreed to add an editor's note on this: "Confirmation that solutions do not weaken 5G security (including privacy) for operators not using 5G to UMTS SRVCC needs to be confirmed, as required by SA plenary study agreement."
| revised | No | S3‑182692 | ||
S3‑182392 | Clarification of ngKSI and ABBA parameter in 5G-AKA | Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd | CR | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182533 | |
S3‑182393 | Clarification for ngksi and ABBA parameter for EAP-AKA’ | Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd | CR |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182534 | ||
S3‑182394 | Discussion on ngKSI | Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd | discussion |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182395 | AKMA Architecture for Non-3GPP Credential Download | Alibaba (China) Group., Ltd. | pCR | Approval |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182520 | |
S3‑182396 | Reply LS on Initial NAS Message Protection | Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd | LS out |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182397 | Steering of Information using Secure Packet | Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd | CR |
7.4.14PLMN RAT selection (Steering of Roaming) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | |||
S3‑182398 | Missing procedure for AS algorithm negotiation for unauthenticated emergency sessions | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182646 | |
S3‑182399 | Corrections and clarifications to interworking clauses | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.10Interworking
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182581 | |
S3‑182400 | Removal of editor’s note on harmonization between inter and intra system handovers | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.10Interworking
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182576 | |
S3‑182401 | Clarifications related to the NAS Container calculation during inter system handover | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.10Interworking
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182575 | |
S3‑182402 | Addition of missing reference to RFC on DTLS over SCTP | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.12NDS
| Yes |
YesHuawei: add a note on the limitation during implementation.
ORANGE: this is implementing the agreement from last meeting.
Ericsson: we only minuted last meeting that we needed to fix the reference.
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182403 | Correction of Note on physical protection for NDS/IP use | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.12NDS
| Yes |
YesDT: say "if" and not "In case".
BT: the specs are control plane only, why remove these words?
It was agreed to remove the note.
| revised | No | S3‑182662 | |
S3‑182404 | New key issue for security key refreshing | Ericsson | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182405 | New key issue for security key storage | Ericsson | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182406 | New key issue for security key and authentication tag size | Ericsson | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182407 | New key issue for integrity protection of small data | Ericsson | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182408 | New key issue for encryption of small data | Ericsson | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182409 | Multiple NAS connections: mobility with horizontal KAMF derivation | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
YesNEC: we don’t reestablish IPSec as described in step 3.
Ericsson: we have to keep this if it is not described somewhere else.
Qualcomm: handover over 4G, and other cases should also be described here.
It was agreed to send an LS to CT1 to know their opinion on the results of the agreements in SA3.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182410 | Correction to clause 6.9.5.2 | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182656 | |
S3‑182411 | Multiple NAS connections: taking a new security context into use on non-3GPP access | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
YesNokia: the existing IPSec would have to be deleted and then created again.
Revised to add this clarification.
| revised | No | S3‑182654 | |
S3‑182412 | Support for Unauthenticated UEs access to RLOS using EPC | Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd | pCR |
8.8Study on Security Aspects of PARLOS (FS_PARLOS_Sec) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | |||
S3‑182413 | On the need for error signalling in inter-PLMN communication | Deutsche Telekom AG | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182561 | |
S3‑182414 | Editorial correction to figure 6.2.1-1 Key hierarchy generation in 5GS | NEC Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.1Key hierarchy
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182573 | |
S3‑182415 | Correction to Clause 5.11.2 Requirements for algorithm selection | NEC Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182416 | EPC solution for RLOS access | Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd | pCR |
8.8Study on Security Aspects of PARLOS (FS_PARLOS_Sec) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182417 | Removal of Note 2a on Kausf use case restriction | NEC Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182659 | |
S3‑182418 | Clarification on Storage of SUPI at SEAF | NEC Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
YesVodafone: store "securely".
This was agreed.
ORANGE, DT, BT: don’t delete the SUPI, just store it.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182419 | Editorial correction to TS 33.501 | NEC Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182420 | Skeleton for TS 33.514 SCAS UDM | NEC Corporation | pCR | Approval |
7.2.4Unified Data Management (UDM) (TS 33.514)
| Yes |
YesChina Mobile: why do we have a general security requirements clause and a specific requirements clause?
Samsung: the general requirements are for all the network entities.
| revised | No | S3‑182598 | |
S3‑182421 | Scope proposal for TS 33.514 SCAS UDM | NEC Corporation | pCR | Approval |
7.2.4Unified Data Management (UDM) (TS 33.514)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182422 | Mitigation against fraudulent registration attack between SEPPs | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
YesNCSC: this is not needed. There was no support for this document so it was not pursued.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182423 | Discussing about the necessity of SCAS for 3GPP virtualized network products | China Mobile | discussion | Discussion |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182424 | Discussing about ToE of SCAS for 3GPP virtualized network products | China Mobile | discussion | Decision |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182425 | Discussing about the SECAM and SCAS for 3GPP virtualized network products | China Mobile | discussion | Decision |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182426 | Implications of Network Function Virtualisation | BT plc | discussion | Discussion |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182427 | New SID on SECAM and SCAS for 3GPP virtualized network products | China Mobile, Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell, China Unicom, CAICT, CATT, ZTE | SID new |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
YesAlex (BT): it misses whether we have to make changes in the architecture in order to virtualize it.
Ericsson: this assumes impact on our architecture and we want to avoid that. Enhancement on the existing architecture is not what SCAS is about.
NCSC: let's extend it beyond SCAS.
The Chair commented that this could duplicate work done in other groups like ETSI ISG NFV. Better to separate SCAS activities from architecture enhancements.
Colin (BT): deployment issues are in scope of GSMA.
Ericsson: we will not be doing security assurance for platforms (e.g. proposed by ETSI NFV).
Nokia: this is a study, there is no normative output here. Ericsson conceded given that this was a study.
| revised | No | S3‑182681 | ||
S3‑182428 | A scenario on UAV Nav in AKMA | China Mobile | pCR |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
YesORANGE: we don’t need new scenarios here unless they bring any substantial change in the architecture. Interdigital supported this.
Companies had many issues with the scenario described here. 429 and 577 were opened to show new scenarios and try to figure out whether these scenarios brough key issues and architecture changes.
Huawei: scenarios belong to SA1. We normally have key issues instead of scenarios in our TRs. ORANGE clarified that the scenarios could be brought as justification for the key issue in a discussion paper.
ORANGE reminded that this was an internal TR, not intended for sharing externally.
This had to be taken offline.
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182429 | A scenario on V2X communication in 5G | China Mobile | pCR |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | |||
S3‑182430 | Discussion and pCR for secure tranferring between network and 3rd party in AKMA | China Mobile, DT, KPN, LG electronics, Alibaba (China) Group., Ltd. | pCR |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | |||
S3‑182431 | Discussion and pCR for identity key issue of AKMA | China Mobile, DT, KPN, Alibaba (China) Group., Ltd. | pCR |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182526 | ||
S3‑182432 | Discussion and pCR for decoupling secure procedure with specific protocol in AKMA | China Mobile, KPN, LG electronics, Alibaba (China) Group., Ltd. | pCR |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | |||
S3‑182433 | Revision of the modification policy in draft CR S3-181937 | China Mobile | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182558 | |
S3‑182434 | Discussion on provision of ngKSI to UE in EAP-Request/AKA'-Challenge message | Huawei, Hisilicon | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182435 | Discussion of error handling for SBA | China Mobile | discussion | Discussion |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182436 | Generic description of security elements | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182613 | S3‑181892 | |
S3‑182437 | Clarification to key hierarchy | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR |
7.1.1Key hierarchy
| Yes |
YesIt was unclear the term "shall be prepared to support 256-bit keys".
Ericsson commented that all interfaces support already 256 bits. This sentence was reworded in the revision.
| revised | No | S3‑182573 | ||
S3‑182438 | Editorial changes to clause 9 | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
YesEricsson: these services are described in our specification.
MCC: not possible to "un-void" clauses. It should have been rev 2.
Ericsson: clause 9.5.1 is referring to the very same spec. Not necessary.
| revised | No | S3‑182664 | S3‑181895 | |
S3‑182439 | Collection of editorial changes | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182528 | ||
S3‑182440 | Update on SEAF requirements | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182589 | S3‑181894 | |
S3‑182441 | Addition of definitions and corrections to references | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182582 | ||
S3‑182442 | Corrections to references related to handling of security contexts in mobility procedures | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR |
7.1.10Interworking
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182540 | ||
S3‑182443 | Clarification to support of authentication methods | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182680 | ||
S3‑182444 | Intro to FS_VERTICAL_LAN_SEC | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | discussion |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182445 | SID_FS_VERTICAL_LAN_SEC | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | SID new |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182682 | ||
S3‑182446 | Provision of ngKSI to UE at EAP-Request/ AKA'-Challenge | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182534 | |
S3‑182447 | Error handling for SBA authentication and authorization in service layer | China Mobile | CR |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
YesDT: what's the benefit of silently discarding here? Also, there is normative text in the notes.
China Mobile: we need a procedure to deal with this error handling.
DT proposed to include these changes in the error messages that they had brought in the discussion paper. In any case the error messages were to be worked on in CT4 so an LS would be sent to them. This was agreed.
BT: "silently discard" wording is used when there is an overload.
| revised | No | S3‑182563 | ||
S3‑182448 | [DRAFT] Reply LS to LS on provision of ngKSI to UE at EAP-Request/AKA'-Challenge | Huawei, Hisilicon | LS out | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182532 | |
S3‑182449 | Discussion on clarification of concept of slice authentication | China Mobile | discussion | Endorsement |
8.9Other study areas
| Yes |
YesORANGE: cat 1 and cat 2 can be discarded. I can agree with cat 3, this slice authentication comes after a succesful primary authentication. I agree with the conclusion. Colin (BT) agreed with cat 3 as well.
China Mobile asked to be minuted that the SA3 preference was on cat 3. ORANGE added that this would be with some modification on the objectives of the Study Item in 2212.
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182450 | Clarification on motivation and privacy concerns for BT and WLAN measurement collection in MDT | China Mobile | discussion |
7.4.16Other work items
| Yes |
YesBT: there's an integrity issue, you can set the SSID to anything you like (spoofing).The initial connection cannot be trusted.
Vodafone: we are concerned about the provisioning aspects of the SSID as well.
Nokia: How does the bluetooth improve the privacy? There is no use for Bluetooth in this case.
China Mobile replied that the operator must have the user consent at first. The user knows that the operator will collect something.
Alec (Interdigital) commented that the user consent was not enough to ensure privacy. The identity should not be given. Giving away the location would not help either if they capture the user's Bluetooth beacon.
Ericsson: it's not up to us to discuss the usefulness of this.Integrity and confidentiality protection would secure this case enough.
Docomo: the operator wants to collect their own Bluetooth beacon, not the user's.They only measure WLAN APs with a certain name as well. A major issue is the use of fake base stations. How to do self-configuration in a secure way would be useful to work on a future work item.
Vodafone: roamers have an issue.
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182451 | Discussion on charging fraud attack | Huawei, Hisilicon | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
YesVodafone commented that a SID would be useful to study the different fraud possibilites but Tim wasn't convinced that a solution or an implemented fix would be enough. Docomo and ORANGE agreed. A SID could be useful.
Qualcomm commented that the visited network had to be trusted. They weren't sure of what could be done here. Qualcomm asked Huawei to bring more details in order to consider a Study Item.
It was agreed that Huawei would bring more details in the next meeting.
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182452 | Clarification on authentication and authorization in SBA | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182569 | |
S3‑182453 | Adding OAuth related authorization services for SBA security | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182670 | |
S3‑182454 | TS 33.834 - editorial updates | Vodafone Espańa SA | pCR | Approval |
8.2Study on Long Term Key Update Procedures (FS_LTKUP) (Rel-16)
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182455 | Draft LS to ETSI SCP regarding the integration of LTKUP solution 4B into the OTA specifications. | Vodafone Espańa SA | LS out | Agreement |
8.2Study on Long Term Key Update Procedures (FS_LTKUP) (Rel-16)
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182456 | CR to TS 33.163 (BEST) - correction of Tag values | Vodafone Espańa SA | CR | Agreement |
7.4.15Battery Efficient Security for very low Throughput Machine Type Communication Devices (BEST_MTC_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182627 | |
S3‑182457 | CR to TS33.163 (BEST) - clarification of error conditions | Vodafone Espańa SA | CR | Agreement |
7.4.15Battery Efficient Security for very low Throughput Machine Type Communication Devices (BEST_MTC_Sec) (Rel-15)
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182458 | CR to 33.163 - Clarification as to when the Serving Network TLV is required | Vodafone Espańa SA | CR | Agreement |
7.4.15Battery Efficient Security for very low Throughput Machine Type Communication Devices (BEST_MTC_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182459 | References to encrypted IEs in the rewritten HTTP message | Ericsson | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182460 | N32-f context | Ericsson | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182461 | Message flows including SEPP | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182462 | Authentication for token-based authorization | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182463 | Clarifications and editorials to clause 13.1 (Transport security for service based interfaces) | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182464 | Clarifications and editorials to clause 13.3 (authentication and static authorization between network functions) | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182465 | Clarifications and editorials to clause 13.1 (Transport security for service based interfaces) | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182570 | |
S3‑182466 | LTKUP: solution#5 evaluation | Gemalto N.V. | pCR | Approval |
8.2Study on Long Term Key Update Procedures (FS_LTKUP) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
YesVodafone: this may misinterpret key issue 5.
Vodafone commented that there were issues left and that they wanted to continue the study.
| revised | No | S3‑182696 | |
S3‑182467 | Key Issue on Authentication | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182468 | Support of 256-bit algorithms: references | Gemalto N.V. | pCR | Approval |
8.3Study on Supporting 256-bit Algorithms for 5G (FS_256-Algorithms) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
YesNCSC: 64 bits is only legacy, it should be 96bits and longer.
Vodafone wanted the first change removed.
| revised | No | S3‑182675 | |
S3‑182469 | Support of 256-bit algorithms: changes | Gemalto N.V. | pCR | Approval |
8.3Study on Supporting 256-bit Algorithms for 5G (FS_256-Algorithms) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
YesNCSC objected to the first change. There were many other concerns on this document so it was finally noted.
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182470 | Updates on Security Mechanism for Steering of Roaming | Samsung, Qualcomm Incorporated, T-Mobile USA | CR |
7.4.14PLMN RAT selection (Steering of Roaming) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | |||
S3‑182471 | Mending MCC EditHelp Comments | Deutsche Telekom AG | pCR | Agreement |
8.1Study on Security Aspects of the 5G Service Based Architecture (FS_SBA-Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182472 | Assignment of FC values to AEFPSK derivation | Samsung | CR |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182624 | ||
S3‑182473 | Clarifications on the calculation of NAS-MAC for RRCConnection re-establishmentwith Control Plane CIoT optimisations (Rel-14) | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.4.10Security Aspects of Narrowband IOT (CIoT)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182614 | |
S3‑182474 | Clarifications on the calculation of NAS-MAC for RRCConnection re-establishmentwith Control Plane CIoT optimisations (Rel-15) | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.4.10Security Aspects of Narrowband IOT (CIoT)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182615 | |
S3‑182475 | Initial NAS security discussion | Qualcomm Incorporated, DT, Vodafone, KPN | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
YesDT: this is not only protecting the message in its current form but also it is safe for the future.
Nokia: too late to change the cal flow, impact on current implementations.I don’t see the threat of the UE being traceable, nothing to protect here.
Vodafone supported Qualcomm's assesment on reverse engineering.
Interidigital: GUTI carries AMF identifier and it is enough to identify a number of UEs that work with an AMF.
Intel: ProSe is not supported in Rel-15, there is no clear threat analysis done and we propose to postpone this for Rel-16.
Ericsson agreed with Intel: it is too late and we are concerned with the impact on stage 2. Postpone to Rel-16.
Vodafone: we had agreed on a change on this. We would need a CR to revert this and it's not postponing: it's taking an action.
Qualcomm agreed with Vodafone. SA3 has rejected this CR twice already.
AT&T: if we don't do it now, we may not do it at all. Docomo agreed.
Nokia: is this an essential feature?
Ericsson: it's fine to introduce this in later Releases.
Docomo: Why is CT1 worried about the delay? Partial cyphering was present in LTE already.
The Chair requested a show of hands on 292 and 475.
Tdoc 292:
Nokia, LG,Intel,Huawei,Ericsson, ZTE.
Tdoc 475:
Vodafone, Qualcomm, IDEMIA,Docomo, DT,ORANGE,Interdigital,BT,NIST,China Mobile,AT&T,Vodafone, Airbus,Gemalto.
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182476 | Reply LS on initial NAS message protection | Qualcomm Incorporated | LS out | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
YesEricsson: it is important to analyze impacts on stage 2.
DT: security by default should be the solution we should aim for.
The Chair suggested that in SA3 a trade-off would be needed in this case if SA3 couldn’t get to the full security solution and let another group decide.
Huawei commented that there seemed to be two sides on this issue: vendors (who saw a huge impact with little gain) and the operators/ handset manufacturers.
Ericsson: we never justified why we needed to protect all the parameters.
Qualcomm: you can link all this to the IMSI.
Docomo agreed with Qualcomm. Alf also wondered where the impact was happening exactly. Ericsson replied that SA2 needed to revise the flow and it was too late to do this stage 2 change now.
Docomo: the impact or cost is in standard development then.
The Chair commented that not sending LS would mean that what is in the TS would remain.He suggested to send an LS stating the disagreement in SA3 on the justification.
Huawei agreed to send such LS and suggested to let SA plenary decide.
It was agreed to create an LS to express the lack of consensus (S3-182632).
Alex (BT) warned about the danger of the operators not being GDPR compliant. He also added that we are required by the regulators to support LI but as operators we cannot justify creating more "holes" than the ones that LI requires.LI "holes" are protected, but here we would have "holes" open to the public.
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182477 | Moving the HASHAMF behaviour from subclause 6.7.2 to subclause 6.4.6 | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182478 | Concurrency issues with N2 and 5G to EPS handovers | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182655 | |
S3‑182479 | Correction to the concurrency rules for parallel NAS connections | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182656 | |
S3‑182480 | Adding to note about ABBA to Annex A.7 that was missed in implementation of CR 0155r2 | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182481 | Discussion on the response to the CT1 LS on provision of ngKSI to UE at EAP-Request/AKA'-Challenge | Qualcomm Incorporated | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182482 | Discussion on security context handling issues when the UE is multiple registered in the same PLMN | Qualcomm Incorporated | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
YesThe LS to cT1 in tdoc 637 is based on this document.
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182483 | Simplification of the UE handling of keys at handover | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182590 | |
S3‑182484 | discussion on RRC Inactive security | Qualcomm Incorporated | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182485 | CR on RRC Inactive | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesHuawei: we cannot revert decisions and come back to something that RAN2 has decided. Adapt option A and forget about option B.
| not pursued | No | ||
S3‑182486 | CR on reigstration procedure for mobility from 4G to 5G | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.10Interworking
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182574 | |
S3‑182487 | K_AMF change indication in NAS SMC | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
YesNokia and Huawei agreed with Qualcomm.
| revised | No | S3‑182638 | |
S3‑182488 | UP policy check | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182644 | |
S3‑182489 | CR on N2 based HO | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182588 | |
S3‑182490 | LS reply on security for E-UTRA connected to 5GC | Qualcomm Incorporated | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182538 | |
S3‑182491 | CR on corrections on the 5GS to EPS handover procedure | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.10Interworking
| Yes |
YesNTT-Docomo: is there any reason to specify 4 or 8 bytes? It's irrelevant from the security point of view.
Ericsson: CT1 usually asks us about the size.
| revised | No | S3‑182579 | |
S3‑182492 | LS on NAS parameter for 5GS to EPS HO | Qualcomm Incorporated | LS out | Approval |
7.1.10Interworking
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182580 | |
S3‑182493 | Handling of initial value of CounterSoR | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.4.14PLMN RAT selection (Steering of Roaming) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182494 | Agenda and notes of 27th June conference call on remaining Rel-15 SBA work | Qualcomm Incorporated | report | Information |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182495 | Assigning FC value to TS 33.122 | Samsung | CR |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182623 | ||
S3‑182496 | Key Issue on PARLOS Security | Motorola Mobility, Lenovo | pCR | Approval |
8.8Study on Security Aspects of PARLOS (FS_PARLOS_Sec) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182497 | Key Issue on Registration and NAS transport for trusted non-3GPP access | Motorola Mobility, Lenovo | pCR | Approval |
8.7Study on the security of the Wireless and Wireline Convergence for the 5G system architecture (FS_5WWC_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182498 | Key Issue on Access to 5GC from UEs that do not support NAS | Motorola Mobility, Lenovo | pCR | Approval |
8.7Study on the security of the Wireless and Wireline Convergence for the 5G system architecture (FS_5WWC_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182499 | [Draft] Reply LS on connection re-establishment security | Samsung | LS out |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesZTE: RAN2's proposal will cause an signalling overload. LTE's mechanisms could be reused here.
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182500 | Update on InactiveMAC-I calculation | Samsung | CR |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesEricsson: this has been here since LTE, so if we want to remove we need to prove that there is a problem. We need a proper justification.
Huawei wanted this change enhanced.
Nokia: we can address the scenarios in the next meeting. Huawei proposed to bring a discussion paper about this.
Ericsson asked to be minuted: calculation of soft resume MAC-I and resume constant input needs to be revisited.
It was agreed to send an LS in 667 to CT1 as well.
| agreed | No | |||
S3‑182501 | Mechanism to mitigate replay attack in RRC-Inactive state | Samsung | CR |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesIt was pointed out that the Issue was identified. Ericsson thought that this issue should be addressed but they didn’t agree with the solutions from Samsung and Huawei. They commented that they would bring a contribution for the next meeting. Huawei would also come back with their solution.
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182502 | Discussion on Key Issues of FS_SBA_Sec | Deutsche Telekom AG | discussion | Endorsement |
8.1Study on Security Aspects of the 5G Service Based Architecture (FS_SBA-Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182503 | Introducing a new set of key issues to TR 33.855 | Deutsche Telekom AG | pCR | Approval |
8.1Study on Security Aspects of the 5G Service Based Architecture (FS_SBA-Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
YesEricsson: this is not in scope of the study.
Deutsche Telekom commented that the former living document had not enough content.
ORANGE: is the intention to stop the Study now or we continue to add content in the next release?
DT commented that they didn’t see realistic to finish the study in this meeting.
MCC commented that if SA3 was going beyond the initial scope and objectives of the Study, they had to revise the Study.
Ericsson: routing issues should be added.
Vodafone didn’t want to see this closed; there were open issues and the study was still useful for Rel-16. The Rel-15 version of SBA was not robust enough to be implemented. ORANGE supported Vodafone.
Ericsson queried whether the study was going to be with a Rel-15 scope or including enhancements for Rel-16.
Nokia: there are a couple of open issues not closed in Rel-15. We don’t want to close it now.
Vodafone: don’t send it for approval for the next Plenary.
BT: what is more interesting is what goes to 33.501. No need to carry on with this TR, close it.
Huawei: close the TR.
ORANGE: approving this document will leave the study incomplete.
Ericsson: the original commitment was to copy the living document into a TR, and save time, This is taking more time than planned. We should close now and open a new Study Item.
Vodafone objected to closing the Study.DT preferred to keep it open too. ORANGE would also object to closing the study.
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182504 | Skeleton for TS 33.513 | Samsung | draft TS |
7.2.3User Plane Function (UPF) (TS 33.513)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182595 | ||
S3‑182505 | Scope for TS 33.513 SCAS UPF | Samsung | pCR |
7.2.3User Plane Function (UPF) (TS 33.513)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | |||
S3‑182506 | Clarification to the protection of attributes by the SEPP | Deutsche Telekom AG | CR | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182565 | |
S3‑182507 | Clarifications to protection policies | Deutsche Telekom AG | CR | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182559 | |
S3‑182508 | New key issue on Privacy of subscriber and application user | LG Electronics | pCR | Approval |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182509 | New key issue on provisioning of CIoT devices | LG Electronics | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| not treated | No | ||
S3‑182510 | New key issue on flexible security of CIoT devices | LG Electronics | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182511 | CR for 33.501 - Editorial correction of 6.9.3 | LG Electronics | CR | Agreement |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182528 | |
S3‑182512 | CR for 33.501 - Editorial correction of 6.7.2 | LG Electronics | CR | Agreement |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182513 | Clause 6.12.2-Adding Routing Indicator in SUCI | CATT, Ericsson , Vodafone, Huawei, NEC, China Mobile, Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell Labs, IDEMIA | CR | Agreement |
7.1.14Privacy
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182535 | S3‑182228 |
S3‑182514 | Disucssion and clarification on SUCI parameters | Huawei, Hisilicon | discussion | Agreement |
7.1.14Privacy
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182515 | LS on SUCI parameters clarification | Huawei, Hisilicon | LS out | Approval |
7.1.14Privacy
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182536 | |
S3‑182516 | Supporting DTLS on gNB internal and external SCTP Interfaces | Huawei, Hisilicon, Nokia | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| not pursued | No | S3‑182239 | |
S3‑182517 | Security requirements on the CAPIF-3e/4e/5e reference points | China Telecommunications | CR | Approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182518 | A scenario on secure communication for shared bikes | Alibaba (China) Group., Ltd., China Mobile | pCR | Approval |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | S3‑182339 | |
S3‑182519 | Response to 3GPP SA2 liaison S2-183036 on ‘general status of work’ | BBF | LS in |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182520 | AKMA Architecture for Non-3GPP Credential Download | Alibaba (China) Group., Ltd., China Mobile | pCR | Approval |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | S3‑182395 | |
S3‑182521 | Commenting contribution on JOSE based protection of HTTP messages over N32-f (S3-182257) | Deutsche Telekom AG | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182522 | Error handling for N32 Application Layer Security | Nokia | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
YesVodafone proposed to have the error handling optional.
Ericsson: error handling being optional is stepping on CT4's (stage 3) territory.
| revised | No | S3‑182564 | |
S3‑182523 | Comments on S3-182209 | Qualcomm Incorporated | discussion |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | |||
S3‑182524 | WI Summary for 5G_Ph1-sec | NTT DOCOMO INC. | WI summary | Endorsement |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182633 | |
S3‑182525 | Update to WID 5G SCAS | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell, Huawei, HiSilicon, China Unicom, CATT, Deutsche Telekom, ZTE, Samsung, KPN, NEC, British Telecom, China Mobile, Ericsson | WID revised | Approval |
7.2.1NR Node B (gNB) (TS 33.511)
| Yes |
YesEricsson was concerned about the amount of resources spent on this work and whether this was used in GSMA and so on. The progress was slow on SCAS.
| revised | No | S3‑182593 | S3‑182332 |
S3‑182526 | Discussion and pCR for identity key issue of AKMA | China Mobile, DT, KPN, Alibaba (China) Group., Ltd. | pCR |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | S3‑182431 | ||
S3‑182527 | Comment on: JOSE based protection of HTTP messages over N32-f (S3-182257) | Ericsson-LG Co., LTD | discussion | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182528 | Collection of editorial changes | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell,LG | CR | - |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182439 | |
S3‑182529 | Reply LS on BL/WLAN measurement collection in MDT | Ericsson | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182358 | |
S3‑182530 | LS to GSMA on slicing | Huawei, HiSilicon | LS out | Approval |
6.4GSMA
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182268 | |
S3‑182531 | Reply to:LS on new work item "X.5Gsec-q" | Vodafone | LS out | approval |
6.8TC-CYBER
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182532 | Reply LS to LS on provision of ngKSI to UE at EAP-Request/AKA'-Challenge | Huawei, Hisilicon | LS out | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182448 | |
S3‑182533 | Clarification of ngKSI and ABBA parameter in 5G-AKA | Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd | CR | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182392 | |
S3‑182534 | Clarification for ngksi and ABBA parameter for EAP-AKA’ | Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd,Huawei,Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | - |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182393 | |
S3‑182535 | Privacy – adding missing detials in SUCI content and format | CATT, Ericsson , Vodafone, Huawei, NEC, China Mobile, Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell Labs, IDEMIA | CR | Agreement |
7.1.14Privacy
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182374 | |
S3‑182536 | LS on SUCI parameters clarification | Huawei, Hisilicon | LS out | Approval |
7.1.14Privacy
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182515 | |
S3‑182537 | Performance aspects for the new 256-bit algorithms | CATT | pCR | Approval |
8.3Study on Supporting 256-bit Algorithms for 5G (FS_256-Algorithms) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
YesThere were many concerns on this document so it had to be noted.
Vodafone proposed a conference call for the following week to have documents like this as an input.
| noted | No | S3‑182251 | |
S3‑182538 | Reply LS on Security aspects of supporting LTE connected to 5GC | Ericsson | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182361 | |
S3‑182539 | Reply LS on UE identity for PO calculation | Ericsson | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182359 | |
S3‑182540 | Corrections to references related to handling of security contexts in mobility procedures | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell,ZTE | CR | - |
7.1.6Security context
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182442 | |
S3‑182541 | Reply LS on RRC Re-establishment security | Huawei, Hisilicon | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182241 | |
S3‑182542 | Reply LS on security requirements for RRC connection release | Huawei, Hisilicon, China Mobile | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182243 | |
S3‑182543 | [MCSec] 33180 R14. Examples of MC service ID shall be URI | Airbus DS SLC | CR | - |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182107 | |
S3‑182544 | [MCSec] 33180 R15. Examples of MC service ID shall be URI | Airbus DS SLC | CR | - |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182108 | |
S3‑182545 | [MCPTT 33180 R14. Clarification for MIKEY-SAKKE values | Airbus DS SLC | CR | - |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182110 | |
S3‑182546 | [MCSec] 33180 R15. Clarification for MIKEY-SAKKE values | Airbus DS SLC | CR | - |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182111 | |
S3‑182547 | Reply LS to S3-182150 security handling when deploying UDSF | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | LS out | - |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
YesThere was no consensus on this LS, and given that SA2 would not meet before the next SA3 meetng, this was noted.
| noted | No | S3‑182215 | |
S3‑182548 | CR to Clause 6.9.3 Removal of KSEAF storage restriction | Nokia, Verizon, TMO-USA,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182201 | |
S3‑182549 | CR for Addition of security requirements for external storage | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai bell, Verizon, TMO-USA | CR | - |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| postponed | No | S3‑182202 | |
S3‑182550 | N32 solution details | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182272 | |
S3‑182551 | N32 terminology and restructuring | Ericsson | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182673 | S3‑182387 |
S3‑182552 | N32-f context | Ericsson | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182673 | S3‑182341 |
S3‑182553 | N32 session key derivation and key hierarchy | Ericsson | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182550 | S3‑182380 |
S3‑182554 | TLS export | Ericsson | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182673 | S3‑182386 |
S3‑182555 | pCR to DraftCR - Protection Policies | Deutsche Telekom | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182552 | S3‑182321 |
S3‑182556 | [MCPTT] 33179 R13. Examples of MC service ID shall be URI | Airbus DS SLC | CR | - |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182557 | [MCPTT] 331179 R13. Clarification for MIKEY-SAKKE values | Airbus DS SLC | CR | - |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182558 | Revision of the modification policy in draft CR S3-181937 | China Mobile | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182673 | S3‑182433 |
S3‑182559 | Clarifications to protection policies | Deutsche Telekom AG | CR | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182673 | S3‑182507 |
S3‑182560 | JOSE based protection of messages over N32-f | Nokia, NCSC,Nokia Shanghai Bell | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182673 | S3‑182257 |
S3‑182561 | On the need for error signalling in inter-PLMN communication | Deutsche Telekom AG | discussion | Endorsement |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| endorsed | No | S3‑182413 | |
S3‑182562 | LS on N32 error signalling | Deutsche Telekom | LS out | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182563 | Error handling for SBA authentication and authorization in service layer | China Mobile | CR | - |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182447 | |
S3‑182564 | Error handling for N32 Application Layer Security | Nokia | other | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| merged | No | S3‑182550 | S3‑182522 |
S3‑182565 | Clarification to the protection of attributes by the SEPP | Deutsche Telekom AG | CR | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182506 | |
S3‑182566 | CR to remove Editor’s Note on additional claims in the access token | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182318 | |
S3‑182567 | CR to remove Editor’s Note on additional parameters that may be required in step 1 of Figure 13.4.1.1-2 | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182319 | |
S3‑182568 | Removal of token validation by NRF | Ericsson,Nokia | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182383 | |
S3‑182569 | Clarification on authentication and authorization in SBA | Huawei, Hisilicon,Ericsson, Nokia | CR | Approval |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182452 | |
S3‑182570 | Clarifications and editorials to clause 13.1 (Transport security for service based interfaces) | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182465 | |
S3‑182571 | Privacy - addressing ENs | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.14Privacy
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182375 | |
S3‑182572 | LS Reply on Control Plane Solution for Steering of Roaming in 5GS | GSMA | LS in | discussion |
7.4.14PLMN RAT selection (Steering of Roaming) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
YesPostponed until receiving some guidance from plenary.
| postponed | No | ||
S3‑182573 | Clarification to key hierarchy | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | - |
7.1.1Key hierarchy
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182437 | |
S3‑182574 | CR on reigstration procedure for mobility from 4G to 5G | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.10Interworking
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182486 | |
S3‑182575 | Clarifications related to the NAS Container calculation during inter system handover | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.10Interworking
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182401 | |
S3‑182576 | Removal of editor’s note on harmonization between inter and intra system handovers | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.10Interworking
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182400 | |
S3‑182577 | A scenario on secure communication for shared bikes | Alibaba (China) Group., Ltd., China Mobile | pCR | Approval |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182578 | AKMA Architecture for Non-3GPP Credential Download | Alibaba (China) Group., Ltd., China Mobile | pCR | Approval |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182579 | CR on corrections on the 5GS to EPS handover procedure | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.10Interworking
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182491 | |
S3‑182580 | LS on NAS parameter for 5GS to EPS HO | Qualcomm Incorporated | LS out | Approval |
7.1.10Interworking
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182492 | |
S3‑182581 | Corrections and clarifications to interworking clauses | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.10Interworking
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182399 | |
S3‑182582 | Addition of definitions and corrections to references | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | - |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
YesNokia pointed out that the corrected definition on “authentication data” in this CR points to a related topic that needs to be addressed.
CT4 29.505 and SA3 33.501 have a different meaning of “authentication data” related to UDM/UDR. Also Nudr service details related to security are missing. It was asked how to solve this and which group is responsible? Nokia encouraged to discuss the details offline and offered to take the lead. Nokia aso stated that the background was available in an email sent to the SA3 reflector.
| agreed | No | S3‑182441 | |
S3‑182583 | CR to clarify username in Annex C | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Approval |
7.1.2Key derivation
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182199 | |
S3‑182584 | Clause 6.7.3.2 - Modification on algorithm selection during N2 handover | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182181 | |
S3‑182585 | Clause 6.9.2 - Modification on security handling during handover | ZTE Corporation,Ericsson | CR | Approval |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182184 | |
S3‑182586 | Mobility – Rectification of NAS MAC calculation for NAS Container | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182368 | |
S3‑182587 | Mobility – Rectification of how DL NAS COUNT is transferred in NAS Container | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182588 | CR on N2 based HO | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182489 | |
S3‑182589 | Update on SEAF requirements | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | - |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182440 | |
S3‑182590 | Simplification of the UE handling of keys at handover | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182483 | |
S3‑182591 | Mobility – Resolving EN and corrections in AS re-keying | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182366 | |
S3‑182592 | Draft TS 33.511 | Huawei | draft TS | Approval |
7.2.1NR Node B (gNB) (TS 33.511)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182593 | Update to WID 5G SCAS | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell, Huawei, HiSilicon, China Unicom, CATT, Deutsche Telekom, ZTE, Samsung, KPN, NEC, British Telecom, China Mobile, Ericsson | WID revised | Approval |
7.2.1NR Node B (gNB) (TS 33.511)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182525 | |
S3‑182594 | Document Skeleton for TS 33.512, based on TS 33.116 | Deutsche Telekom AG | draft TS | Approval |
7.4.9Security Assurance Specifications (SCAS-SA3, SCAS_PGW, SCAS_eNB)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182331 | |
S3‑182595 | Skeleton for TS 33.513 | Samsung | draft TS | - |
7.2.3User Plane Function (UPF) (TS 33.513)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182504 | |
S3‑182596 | Draft TS 33.513 | Samsung | draft TS | Approval |
7.2.3User Plane Function (UPF) (TS 33.513)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182597 | Draft TS 33.514 | NEC | draft TS | Approval |
7.2.4Unified Data Management (UDM) (TS 33.514)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182598 | Skeleton for TS 33.514 SCAS UDM | NEC Corporation | pCR | Approval |
7.2.4Unified Data Management (UDM) (TS 33.514)
| Yes |
YesClause 4 is gone.
| approved | No | S3‑182420 | |
S3‑182599 | skeleton of TS 33515 | Huawei, Hisilicon | draft TS | Approval |
7.2.5Session Management Function (SMF) (TS 33.515)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182306 | |
S3‑182600 | Draft TS 33.515 | Huawei | draft TS | Approval |
7.2.5Session Management Function (SMF) (TS 33.515)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182601 | [MCPTT] 33180 R15 Fix XML schema | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.8Mission Critical (MCPTT, MCSec, eMCSec, MONASTERY_SEC)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182222 | |
S3‑182602 | Alignment of terminology in RRCConnctionReestablsihment Procedure in R14 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.1SAE/LTE Security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182298 | |
S3‑182603 | Alignment of terminology in RRCConnctionReestablsihment Procedure in R15 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.1SAE/LTE Security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182299 | |
S3‑182604 | LTE EDT - Updates in suspend/resume | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.4.1SAE/LTE Security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182349 | |
S3‑182605 | LS on security aspects of EDT | Ericsson | LS out | Approval |
7.4.1SAE/LTE Security
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182606 | Update NDS/IP scope with application layer crypto profiles | Juniper Networks | CR | - |
7.4.3Network Domain Security (NDS)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182167 | |
S3‑182607 | Update NDS/IP scope with application layer crypto profiles | Juniper Networks | CR | - |
7.4.3Network Domain Security (NDS)
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182608 | Clarify NDS/AF intro regarding crypto profiles | Juniper Networks | CR | - |
7.4.3Network Domain Security (NDS)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182169 | |
S3‑182609 | Clarify NDS/AF intro regarding crypto profiles | Juniper Networks | CR | - |
7.4.3Network Domain Security (NDS)
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182610 | Modifications on Security procedures for API invoker onboarding | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182276 | |
S3‑182611 | EDCE5 security requirements and corresponding test cases for MeNB | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.9Security Assurance Specifications (SCAS-SA3, SCAS_PGW, SCAS_eNB)
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182612 | Clarifications in TS 33117 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.9Security Assurance Specifications (SCAS-SA3, SCAS_PGW, SCAS_eNB)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182316 | |
S3‑182613 | Generic description of security elements | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | - |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182436 | |
S3‑182614 | Clarifications on the calculation of NAS-MAC for RRCConnection re-establishmentwith Control Plane CIoT optimisations (Rel-14) | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.4.10Security Aspects of Narrowband IOT (CIoT)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182473 | |
S3‑182615 | Clarifications on the calculation of NAS-MAC for RRCConnection re-establishmentwith Control Plane CIoT optimisations (Rel-15) | Qualcomm Incorporated | CR | Agreement |
7.4.10Security Aspects of Narrowband IOT (CIoT)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182474 | |
S3‑182616 | LS on using same counters in EDCE5 | Ericsson | LS out | Approval |
7.4.11EPC enhancements to support 5G New Radio via Dual Connectivity (EDCE5)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182617 | Reply to: LS on CAPIF4xMB | Samsung | LS out | approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
YesAnswering the question on authentication and authorization.
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182618 | Security requirements for API invoker onboarding and offboarding | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182275 | |
S3‑182619 | Clarification on Security protections in CAPIF-1 and CAPIF-2 reference point | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182277 | |
S3‑182620 | [CAPIF_Sec] 33122 R15 access token profile | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182216 | |
S3‑182621 | Clarification on access token verification | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182278 | |
S3‑182622 | [CAPIF-Sec] 33122 correct note in clause 6.5.2.1 | Motorola Solutions UK Ltd. | CR | Agreement |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182218 | |
S3‑182623 | FC value in TS 33.220 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182280 | |
S3‑182624 | Adding FC value to TS 33.122 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.13Security Aspects of Common API Framework for 3GPP Northbound APIs (CAPIF_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182281 | |
S3‑182625 | Study of KDF negotiation for 5G System Security | Huawei, Hisilicon, | SID new | Approval |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
YesORANGE: overlapping with our study in LTE-CUP.
AT&T supported this SID.
Qualcomm: RAN related stuff should go to a different SID. A single SID with a long list of objectives woud be too much and this is the way other 3GPP WGs are working this way. ORANGE supported this.
| agreed | No | S3‑182244 | |
S3‑182626 | Adding BEST Support for non-IP PDN Connections that Terminate at the SCEF | Convida Wireless, InterDigital, Inc. | CR | Approval |
7.4.15Battery Efficient Security for very low Throughput Machine Type Communication Devices (BEST_MTC_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182119 | |
S3‑182627 | CR to TS 33.163 (BEST) - correction of Tag values | Vodafone Espańa SA | CR | Agreement |
7.4.15Battery Efficient Security for very low Throughput Machine Type Communication Devices (BEST_MTC_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182456 | |
S3‑182628 | Discussion and pCR for identity key issue of AKMA | China Mobile, DT, KPN, Alibaba (China) Group., Ltd. | pCR | - |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182629 | Reply to: LS OUT on OAuth 2.0 | Ericsson | LS out | approval |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182630 | Reply to: LS OUT on TLS and inter PLMN routing | NTT-Docomo | LS out | approval |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182631 | EPC solution for RLOS access | Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd | pCR | - |
8.8Study on Security Aspects of PARLOS (FS_PARLOS_Sec) (Rel-16)
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182632 | Reply to: LS on initial NAS message protection | NTT-Docomo | LS out | approval |
7.1.15Incoming and outgoing Lses
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182633 | WI Summary for 5G_Ph1-sec | NTT DOCOMO INC. | WI summary | Endorsement |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
Yes
| endorsed | No | S3‑182524 | |
S3‑182634 | Study on 5G security enhancement against false base stations | Apple Computer Trading Co. Ltd | SID new | Approval |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182704 | S3‑182249 |
S3‑182635 | Clause 5.2.5 - Modification on subscriber privacy | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.14Privacy
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182171 | |
S3‑182636 | Mobility – Corrections for usage of local policy at AMF | Ericsson,ZTE,Nokia | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182367 | |
S3‑182637 | LS on security issues on Multi NAS scenarios | Qualcomm | LS out | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182638 | K_AMF change indication in NAS SMC | Qualcomm Incorporated,Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182487 | |
S3‑182639 | Use the old KRRCint for calculation of the security token in MSG3 | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182377 | |
S3‑182640 | Reply LS on inactive security | Ericsson | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182354 | |
S3‑182641 | CR to add a missing step to discover an NF producer instance during Access Token Request | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell,Ericsson,Huawei | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182273 | |
S3‑182642 | CR to add Access Token Request procedure for a specific NF service producer | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182274 | |
S3‑182643 | CR on mandatory ciphering of access tokens by NRF in inter-PLMN scenarios | Nokia,Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.2Other
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182644 | UP policy check | Qualcomm Incorporated,ZTE,CATT | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182488 | |
S3‑182645 | Clause 6.6.2 - Modification on UP security activation mechanism | ZTE Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182180 | |
S3‑182646 | Algorithm Negotiation for Unauthenticated UEs in LSM | Huawei, HiSilicon, China Mobile.Ericsson | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182237 | |
S3‑182647 | Clarifications in TS 33117 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.4.9Security Assurance Specifications (SCAS-SA3, SCAS_PGW, SCAS_eNB)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182648 | DC - definition corrections | Ericsson,CATT | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
YesIncludes the definition part of tdoc 2231.
| agreed | No | S3‑182350 | |
S3‑182649 | Other Security Procedures for Dual Connectivity | Huawei, HiSilicon,Ericsson,CATT | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182260 | |
S3‑182650 | Align AS SMC procedure with SA2 and RAN3 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182301 | |
S3‑182651 | CR to delete ENs in clause 5.3 gNB Requirements | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182205 | |
S3‑182652 | Update of definition of 5G AS security context for 3GPP access | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182376 | |
S3‑182653 | Define and clarify ABBA parameter | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182209 | |
S3‑182654 | Multiple NAS connections: taking a new security context into use on non-3GPP access | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182411 | |
S3‑182655 | Clause 6.9.5.1 - Add rule for concurrent running of security procedures | ZTE Corporation,Qualcomm | CR | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182193 | |
S3‑182656 | Clause 6.9.5.2 - Modify rule for concurrent running of security procedures | ZTE Corporation,Ericsson,Qualcomm | CR | Approval |
7.1.5NAS security
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182194 | |
S3‑182657 | Editorial corrections to TS 33.501 | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182279 | |
S3‑182658 | Corrections on primary authentication | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182284 | |
S3‑182659 | Removal of Note 2a on Kausf use case restriction | NEC Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182417 | |
S3‑182660 | Clarification on Storage of SUPI at SEAF | NEC Corporation | CR | Approval |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182661 | LS-out-to-SA2-on secondary re-authentication | Huawei, HiSilicon | LS out | Approval |
7.1.9Secondary authentication
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182270 | |
S3‑182662 | Correction of Note on physical protection for NDS/IP use | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.12NDS
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182403 | |
S3‑182663 | Protection of non SBA interfaces internal to 5G core. | Deutsche Telecom AG | CR | - |
7.1.12NDS
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182664 | Editorial changes to clause 9 | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | - |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182438 | |
S3‑182665 | SID on Enhanced network Slicing | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell,NEC, Huawei, HiSilicon,Motorola Mobility, Lenovo | SID new | Approval |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182212 | |
S3‑182666 | Mobility – Clarification in intra-gNB-CU handover | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182363 | |
S3‑182667 | LS on calculation of inactive MAC-I token | Samsung | LS out | Approval |
7.1.4AS security
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182668 | LS on inidication for keys syncronization | ZTE | LS out | Approval |
7.1.3Mobility
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182669 | revised WID 5G Phase one security | NTT-Docomo | WID revised | Agreement |
7.1.16Others
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182670 | Adding OAuth related authorization services for SBA security | Huawei, Hisilicon | CR | Approval |
7.1.13.2Other
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182453 | |
S3‑182671 | New WID on security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to 3G | China Unicom, Huawei, HiSilicon, ZTE, CATT, OPPO | WID new | - |
7.5New Work Item proposals
| Yes |
YesORANGE asked if the study was considered as finsihed and the TR sent for approval.
BT proposed to send it for information, given that the spec was still missing the SA requirement.
Huawei commented that the SA2 WID was to be finished in December.
The Chair commented that SA3 usually finished a cycle later than SA2 and that there was no rush. This was a Rel-16 Work Item.
Docomo: impact on 5G security needs to be clarified before we go for a WID.
The Chair noted the WID and asked China Unicom to bring the WID back for the next meeting. The TR 33.856 was to be sent for information to SA.
| noted | No | S3‑182334 | |
S3‑182672 | Draft CR on Application layer security on the N32 interface | Nokia | draftCR | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| revised | No | S3‑182673 | |
S3‑182673 | Draft CR on Application layer security on the N32 interface | Nokia | draftCR | Approval |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
YesIt merges all content for the draft CR.
| approved | No | S3‑182672 | |
S3‑182674 | LS on Specification of the EAS-C/U interfaces for BEST | InterDigital, Inc. | LS out | Agreement |
7.4.15Battery Efficient Security for very low Throughput Machine Type Communication Devices (BEST_MTC_Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182120 | |
S3‑182675 | Support of 256-bit algorithms: references | Gemalto N.V. | pCR | Approval |
8.3Study on Supporting 256-bit Algorithms for 5G (FS_256-Algorithms) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182468 | |
S3‑182676 | Draft TR 33.841 | Vodafone | draft TR | Approval |
8.3Study on Supporting 256-bit Algorithms for 5G (FS_256-Algorithms) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182677 | Study on the supporting of perfect forward secrecy for 5G Authentication and Key Agreement Protocols | Huawei | SID new | Agreement |
8.10New study item proposals
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182678 | New SID on Security of the enhancement to the 5GC location services | CATT | SID new | Agreement |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182250 | |
S3‑182679 | The SID on security for 5G URLLC | Huawei, HiSilicon | SID new | Approval |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182265 | |
S3‑182680 | Clarification to support of authentication methods | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | CR | - |
7.1.8Primary authentication
| Yes |
YesORANGE didn’t support the added note. It's confusing and it's not adding anything.
Nokia commented that they got questions from operators on how they had to choose.
IDEMIA didn’t see the need for this note.
Ericsson commented that this was just a note, no wrong technical issue here.
Qualcomm: if we are having this confusion here, this needs to be clarified to the outside world.
| not pursued | No | S3‑182443 | |
S3‑182681 | New SID on SECAM and SCAS for 3GPP virtualized network products | China Mobile, Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell, China Unicom, CAICT, CATT, ZTE | SID new | - |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182427 | |
S3‑182682 | Study on Security for 5GS Enhanced support of Vertical and LAN Services | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | SID new | - |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182445 | |
S3‑182683 | TR 33.855 | Deutsche Telekom | draft TR | Approval |
8.1Study on Security Aspects of the 5G Service Based Architecture (FS_SBA-Sec) (Rel-15)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182684 | a proposal for the key issue on protecting the SRVCC capability of TR33.856 | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182289 | |
S3‑182685 | Draft TR 33.856 | China Unicom | draft TR | Approval |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182686 | a proposal for protecting the SRVCC capability of TR33.856 | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182290 | |
S3‑182687 | evaluation of solution 1.1 for KI#1 | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182288 | |
S3‑182688 | Evaluation for solution #1.1 | China Unicom | pCR | - |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182336 | |
S3‑182689 | Evaluation for solution #1.2 | China Unicom | pCR | - |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182338 | |
S3‑182690 | Evaluation for solution #1.3 | China Unicom | pCR | - |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182347 | |
S3‑182691 | conclusion for key issue on protecting the SRVCC capability in initial NAS message | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182291 | |
S3‑182692 | Propose the content of conclusions | China Unicom | pCR | - |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182391 | |
S3‑182693 | editorial modification on TR33.856 | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182286 | |
S3‑182694 | Key Issue on Authentication | Huawei, Hisilicon | pCR | Approval |
8.6Study on evolution of Cellular IoT security for the 5G System (FS_CIoT_sec_5G) (Rel-16)
| No |
Yes
| withdrawn | Yes | ||
S3‑182695 | Key Issue on secure communication between UE and 3rd party application server | China Mobile | pCR | Approval |
8.5Study on authentication and key management for applications based on 3GPP credential in 5G IoT (FS_AKMA)(Rel-16)
| Yes |
YesClause 3.1 (offline discussion bullets) was endorsed.
ORANGE considered that submitting a new key issue this late was not appropriate and the he needed more time to study it.
| noted | No | ||
S3‑182696 | LTKUP: solution#5 evaluation | Gemalto N.V. | pCR | Approval |
8.2Study on Long Term Key Update Procedures (FS_LTKUP) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182466 | |
S3‑182697 | Clarifications in clause 13.5 | Ericsson | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182698 | SA3 meeting calendar | MCC | other | - |
10Future Meeting Dates and Venues
| Yes |
Yes
| noted | No | S3‑182104 | |
S3‑182699 | Work Plan input from Rapporteurs | MCC | other | - |
9.2Rapporteur input on status of WID or SID
| No |
Yes
| noted | No | S3‑182105 | |
S3‑182700 | Application layer security on the N32 interface | Nokia | CR | Agreement |
7.1.13.1Interconnect (SEPP related)
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | ||
S3‑182701 | Update to LS on Implementation of NESAS Pilot Findings in SCAS specifications | Nokia, Nokia Shanghai Bell | LS out | Approval |
7.4.9Security Assurance Specifications (SCAS-SA3, SCAS_PGW, SCAS_eNB)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | S3‑182346 | |
S3‑182702 | Draft TR 33.834 | Vodafone | draft TR | Approval |
8.2Study on Long Term Key Update Procedures (FS_LTKUP) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
Yes
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182703 | Cover sheet for TR 33.856 | China Unicom | TS or TR cover | Approval |
8.4Security aspects of single radio voice continuity from 5G to UTRAN (FS_5G_UTRAN_SEC) (Rel-16)
| Yes |
YesTR 33.856 is sent for information.
| approved | No | ||
S3‑182704 | Study on 5G security enhancement against false base stations | Apple Computer Trading Co. Ltd | SID new | Approval |
8.10New study item proposals
| Yes |
Yes
| agreed | No | S3‑182634 |