Re: [Cfrg] 40 bit loop and DragonFly

[Watson Ladd <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Dan Harkins <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, January 7, 2014 5:47 am, Watson Ladd wrote:
>> Try writing up SPAKE2, submit it, and see how long it takes to
>> get a good standard through.
>
>   You're the one proposing it, why don't you? In fact, since you have
> previously stated it really only takes 30 minutes to write an
> interoperable standard why don't you do it during your lunch hour?

Because http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-shin-tls-augpake-01 exists already.
In fact, AugPAKE is necessary to avoid an attacker breaking into my coffee pot
from changing my alarm clock as well. These are critical systems you are
talking about!

Why don't we move this over to TLS, get augpake through, and be done with it.
It satisfies everyone's needs.
>
>> Dragonfly has unfixable flaws relating to its provable security that will
>> prevent me from endorsing it for any protocol, ever. I am not alone in
>> thinking that we should expect more from the protocols we standardize.
>>
>> Also, is this implemented in OpenSSL or NSS or PolarSSL? Not yet.
>
>   ZZzzzztt! Wrong. I implemented it in OpenSSL. That's where Appendix
> A of draft-ietf-tls-pwd came from. In fact, the sample exchange was
> from my EST client talking to my EST server being authenticated with
> TLS-pwd.
>
>> Lastly, if this was needed for EST to work, they should have noticed
>> this dependency, and tackled it head on. That they punted on
>> this problem does not mean it is our responsibility to fix it.
>
>   You use pronouns very loosely. And you exaggerate a bit too much.
> Nobody said it was necessary for EST to work. It's needed for EST to
> be deployed properly in many situations where there is no trust
> anchor database established before the EST exchange is initiated.
> There is a chicken-and-egg problem with needing a certificate to
> get a certificate. Understand?
>
>   Dan.
>
>
>
>



-- 
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little
Temporary Safety deserve neither  Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin