[CHANNEL-BINDING] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] lasgt call comments (st Call: draft-altman-tls-channel-bindings (Channel Bindings for TLS) to Proposed Standard))
Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com> Fri, 30 October 2009 22:48 UTC
Return-Path: <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com>
X-Original-To: channel-binding@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: channel-binding@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F411B3A68B1; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:48:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.045
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.045 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tfIUfHhXy2Bj; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:48:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com (brmea-mail-1.Sun.COM [192.18.98.31]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0973B3A6843; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:48:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dm-central-02.central.sun.com ([129.147.62.5]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n9UMmFPs019151; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 22:48:15 GMT
Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (binky.Central.Sun.COM [129.153.128.104]) by dm-central-02.central.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id n9UMmFvG011443; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:48:15 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n9UMamJo004135; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:36:48 -0500 (CDT)
Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id n9UMam8c004134; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:36:48 -0500 (CDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: binky.Central.Sun.COM: nw141292 set sender to Nicolas.Williams@sun.com using -f
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:36:48 -0500
From: Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com>
To: Larry Zhu <larry.zhu@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <20091030223647.GO1105@Sun.COM>
References: <20091005162704.8C1B43A6873@core3.amsl.com> <D3DC9D45B39CFC4CB312B2DD279B354C29BADFF7@TK5EX14MBXW653.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <D3DC9D45B39CFC4CB312B2DD279B354C29BADFF7@TK5EX14MBXW653.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i
Cc: "channel-binding@ietf.org" <channel-binding@ietf.org>, "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>, "sasl@ietf.org" <sasl@ietf.org>
Subject: [CHANNEL-BINDING] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] lasgt call comments (st Call: draft-altman-tls-channel-bindings (Channel Bindings for TLS) to Proposed Standard))
X-BeenThere: channel-binding@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of channel binding IANA registry requests and specifications <channel-binding.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/channel-binding>, <mailto:channel-binding-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/channel-binding>
List-Post: <mailto:channel-binding@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:channel-binding-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/channel-binding>, <mailto:channel-binding-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 22:48:02 -0000
I spoke at length with Larry. His concern is that the word "conenction" might be taken to mean "TCP connection" or "connection for the transport below TLS". Clearly it is not reasonable to expect to extract the TLS channel binding from the "connection for the transport below TLS"! Larry's proposal to say "session" was only to make that confusion go away, but that proposal is very difficult to implement (as I described separately already). Larry has indicated to me (and I expect will indicate on the list in reply to this email) that he will be happy if we simply clarify that "TLS connection" refers to the TLS state, NOT to the transport below. Unfortunately RFC5246 does not seem to have a term by which to refer the "TLS connection" unambiguously: "connection" is defined in the glossary (page 80) to mean that which Larry doesn't want (underlying transport), but then, in section 6.1 RFC5246 quite clearly uses the word "connection" to refer to "TLS connection", not to the underlying transport. Thus this is a simple matter of wordsmithing. Another problem that Larry has is that in his implementation what I call a "TLS connection" is called a "security context", and if the application re-handshakes (e.g., to authenticate a user) then the result is a second security context -- we need to be extra clear that it's the client Finished message from the _first_ "security context" that we're after. My proposal, then, is this: OLD: Description: The client's TLS Finished message (note: the Finished struct) from the first handshake of the connection (note: connection, not session, so that the channel binding is specific to each connection regardless of whether session resumption is used). NEW: Description: The client's TLS Finished message (note: the Finished struct) from the first handshake of the application's TLS connection. NOTES: a) If a session is resumed, the client's TLS Finished message from the session resumption handshake is to be used; b) If a client does multiple TLS handshakes in sequence, each protected by the previous one, then the client's TLS Finished message from the first/outermost TLS connection is to be used; c) By "TLS connection" we refer to the TLS connection state, not to any notion of connection of any underlying transport protocols (such as TCP, UDP, SCTP, etcetera). I'm not sure that we can make it any clearer. Larry, please review. Martin, please review. Nico --
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] lasgt … Nicolas Williams
- [CHANNEL-BINDING] Last Call: draft-altman-tls-cha… The IESG
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] Last Call: draft-altman-tls… Simon Josefsson
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] Last Call: draft-altman-tls… Nicolas Williams
- [CHANNEL-BINDING] Unrelated (Re: [TLS] RESOLVED (… Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [sasl] lasgt call comments … Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] lasgt call comments (st Cal… Simon Josefsson
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] lasgt call comments (st Cal… Simon Josefsson
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [sasl] lasgt call comments … Nicolas Williams
- [CHANNEL-BINDING] lasgt call comments (st Call: d… Larry Zhu
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] lasgt call comments (st Cal… Larry Zhu
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] [sasl] lasgt call com… Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] [sasl] lasgt call com… Larry Zhu
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] [sasl] lasgt call com… Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [sasl] lasgt call comments … Larry Zhu
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] [sasl] lasgt call com… Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] [sasl] lasgt call com… Martin Rex
- [CHANNEL-BINDING] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] lasgt call… Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Martin Rex
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] lasgt … Simon Josefsson
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] lasgt … Martin Rex
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Martin Rex
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Martin Rex
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Peter Gutmann
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] Unrelated (Re: [TLS] RESOLV… Martin Rex
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] Unrelated (Re: [TLS] RESOLV… Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Martin Rex
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] lasgt call comments (… Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] lasgt call comments (… Simon Josefsson
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [sasl] [TLS] lasgt call com… Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Jeffrey Hutzelman
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [sasl] [TLS] lasgt call com… Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Michael D'Errico
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Sam Hartman
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] lasgt call comments (… Simon Josefsson
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] lasgt call comments (… Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] RESOLVED (Re: [sasl] … Larry Zhu
- [CHANNEL-BINDING] New Problem (Was: Last Call: dr… Nicolas Williams
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] New Problem (Was: Las… Larry Zhu
- Re: [CHANNEL-BINDING] [TLS] New Problem (Was: Las… Nicolas Williams