Re: Discussion of 9.2.2

Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi> Thu, 25 September 2014 17:37 UTC

Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 17:34:42 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1XXCwE-0008EW-H7@frink.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 20:33:54 +0300
From: Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Cc: Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20140925173354.GA5976@LK-Perkele-VII>
References: <F0D4BA2A-46B2-4F1A-8A23-1A319A3E5FC0@mnot.net> <CABkgnnV0HFeshNAe9CAzFDeED6Os_GmG6kxm827N18wduCkjiA@mail.gmail.com> <CAH_y2NFu=kyTVK_neACEVyWp9m4wfLOUu-=Dc9nZoMhP+fNSsg@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBMOqi+5LFzf1MmQuuW+4O7Pmvky68riNqtJDcbzQnvQig@mail.gmail.com> <CAH_y2NHCXamQrPQZyezkJ-NSZUPTdqjbyTDNufbJSiQ1q_QMjg@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBO46e9TpL_kksL5khPx0zbHv0Y3ZD1kp9ka8tzbMf5yhg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBO46e9TpL_kksL5khPx0zbHv0Y3ZD1kp9ka8tzbMf5yhg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=62.142.5.109; envelope-from=ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi; helo=emh03.mail.saunalahti.fi
Subject: Re: Discussion of 9.2.2
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20140925173354.GA5976@LK-Perkele-VII>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list

On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 10:05:16AM -0700, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com> wrote:
> >
> > I think this indicates that the wording of 9.2.2 is indeed causing
> > confusion and has actually created wrong implementations.   In FF the 9.2.2
> > test is currently implemented as:
> >
> >    isAEAD()
> >
> > when it should be:
> >
> >    !isBlock() && !isStream()
> >
> > The former is a interoperability problem for future acceptable non AEAD
> > ciphers, while the later is not.
> >
> 
> Trying to think this through....
> 
> Isn't that only true if we add a new non-AEAD ciphersuite in NSS and then
> forget
> to update the code in Firefox?

Nope. Somebody WILL dynamically link the TLS librariesif the platform
supports dynamic linkage at all (and most non-constrained stuff does).

And even if stock Firefox statically links NSS, there is at least one
rebranded one (checked the memory map) that dynamically links system
NSS (hello version skew!).

-Ilari

Discussion of 9.2.2 Mark Nottingham
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Roland Zink
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Greg Wilkins
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Jason Greene
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Martin Thomson
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Greg Wilkins
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Eric Rescorla
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Roland Zink
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Greg Wilkins
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Eric Rescorla
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Michael Sweet
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Jason Greene
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Ilari Liusvaara
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Patrick McManus
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Mark Nottingham
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Greg Wilkins
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Greg Wilkins
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Jason Greene
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Julian Reschke
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Martin Thomson
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Michael Sweet
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Jason Greene
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Eric Rescorla
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Jason Greene
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Jason Greene
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Michael Sweet
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Greg Wilkins
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Willy Tarreau
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Martin Nilsson
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Jason Greene
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Michael Sweet
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Greg Wilkins
Re: Discussion of 9.2.2 Martin Nilsson