Re: [Cfrg] erratum for hmac what do we think...

Dan Brown <danibrown@blackberry.com> Thu, 02 February 2017 15:26 UTC

Return-Path: <danibrown@blackberry.com>
X-Original-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AB1512965D for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 07:26:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yV89BkPBHUis for <cfrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 07:26:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-p02.blackberry.com (smtp-p02.blackberry.com [208.65.78.89]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73B8712946B for <Cfrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 07:26:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xct105cnc.rim.net ([10.65.161.205]) by mhs215cnc.rim.net with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 02 Feb 2017 10:26:41 -0500
Received: from XCT112CNC.rim.net (10.65.161.212) by XCT105CNC.rim.net (10.65.161.205) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 10:26:40 -0500
Received: from XMB116CNC.rim.net ([fe80::45d:f4fe:6277:5d1b]) by XCT112CNC.rim.net ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 10:26:40 -0500
From: Dan Brown <danibrown@blackberry.com>
To: "Paterson, Kenny" <Kenny.Paterson@rhul.ac.uk>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, "cfrg@irtf.org" <Cfrg@irtf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Cfrg] erratum for hmac what do we think...
Thread-Index: AQHSfPuN6HvCHp+9s0S4RLJsKwPOB6FWFVKA///CNeA=
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 15:26:39 +0000
Message-ID: <20170202152629.98033754.871.9639@blackberry.com>
References: <666efaf7-b660-e20b-8a8a-8949a64e9bed@cs.tcd.ie>, <D4B8ED5B.83EFC%kenny.paterson@rhul.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <D4B8ED5B.83EFC%kenny.paterson@rhul.ac.uk>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-CA
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cfrg/UhtW44qZ_bbImbmQ723d10SxNVo>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] erratum for hmac what do we think...
X-BeenThere: cfrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <cfrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cfrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:cfrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg>, <mailto:cfrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 15:26:45 -0000

http://ia.cr/2013/382

might be relevant, theoretically, but I'm no expert...



Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Rogers network.
  Original Message
From: Paterson, Kenny
Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2017 9:08 AM
To: Stephen Farrell; cfrg@irtf.org
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] erratum for hmac what do we think...


Dear CFRG,

It'd be great if some HMAC experts could take a look at this proposed
erratum and give a view on it.

I looked quickly myself. It's an undesirable property, but I don't think
it's disastrous (yes, I could invent scenarios where one could come
unstuck because of it). It reminds me somewhat of the well-known, and
again somewhat unfortunate, fact that HMAC keys of different lengths can
end up being padded to form colliding keys.

Cheers,

Kenny

On 02/02/2017 02:24, "Cfrg on behalf of Stephen Farrell"
<cfrg-bounces@irtf.org on behalf of stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:

>
>Hiya,
>
>There's an erratum posted for hmac [1] where I'd be
>interested in what folks here think.
>
>I'm unsure if this is a real problem, esp given that
>there are I guess a lot of implementations.
>
>And even if it were a real problem, I'm not sure we'd
>want that fix.
>
>Opinions welcome...
>
>Thanks,
>S.
>
>[1]
>https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=2104&eid=4809&rec_status=
>15&area_acronym=&errata_type=&wg_acronym=&submitter_name=&stream_name=&sub
>mit_date=&presentation=records
>

_______________________________________________
Cfrg mailing list
Cfrg@irtf.org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg