Re: HTTP/2 States and Frame Types <draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-17>

Bob Briscoe <bob.briscoe@bt.com> Sat, 07 March 2015 15:20 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ietf.org@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9A2A1A8AD6 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 07:20:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 lhYzSdgXcoLE for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 07:20:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0552E1A89C7 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 07:20:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1YUGSp-00044u-G9 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:16:27 +0000
Resent-Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:16:27 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1YUGSp-00044u-G9@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <bob.briscoe@bt.com>) id 1YUGSd-00041X-5v for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:16:15 +0000
Received: from hubrelay-rd.bt.com ([62.239.224.99]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <bob.briscoe@bt.com>) id 1YUGSb-0001yc-Mk for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:16:15 +0000
Received: from EVMHR71-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net (10.36.3.109) by EVMHR68-UKRD.bt.com (10.187.101.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.348.2; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:15:42 +0000
Received: from EPHR01-UKIP.domain1.systemhost.net (147.149.196.177) by EVMHR71-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net (10.36.3.109) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.348.2; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:15:39 +0000
Received: from bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk (132.146.168.158) by EPHR01-UKIP.domain1.systemhost.net (147.149.196.177) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.181.6; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:15:36 +0000
Received: from BTP075694.jungle.bt.co.uk ([10.109.146.98]) by bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk (8.13.5/8.12.8) with ESMTP id t27FFXAa022983; Sat, 7 Mar 2015 15:15:34 GMT
Message-ID: <201503071515.t27FFXAa022983@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:15:33 +0000
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
From: Bob Briscoe <bob.briscoe@bt.com>
CC: Mike Belshe <mbelshe@chromium.org>, "fenix@google.com" <fenix@google.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnXSGmXH4w_9QGPfu8-ty6tQ3yiVLqCcENfxiEU1JHYPTw@mail.g mail.com>
References: <201503061905.t26J5JmY015035@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk> <CABkgnnXSGmXH4w_9QGPfu8-ty6tQ3yiVLqCcENfxiEU1JHYPTw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 132.146.168.158
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=62.239.224.99; envelope-from=bob.briscoe@bt.com; helo=hubrelay-rd.bt.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.762, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1YUGSb-0001yc-Mk 4e40ca48843464e7cbc7ca1c47d37905
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: HTTP/2 States and Frame Types <draft-ietf-httpbis-http2-17>
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/201503071515.t27FFXAa022983@bagheera.jungle.bt.co.uk>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/28907
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Martin,

Don't listen to me on cryptography, I don't 
follow it. I'm probably out of date.

Nonetheless, I just skimmed the POODLE paper 
[Möller14]. From my reading, POODLE surely only 
applies to padding that is beyond the coverage of 
the MAC (i.e. which necessarily has to have been 
added while encrypting). I don't think these 
chosen ciphertext attacks (CCAs) apply to HTTP/2 
padding, because the HTTP/2 padding is in the 
layer below the encryption process, so it will 
surely always be covered by the MAC.

If, as in HTTP/2, the length of the padding field 
is given in the protocol header (which is then 
encrypted), I believe the padding can be 
arbitrary, and I assume it's best for the padding 
not to be structured (predictable).

But please don't take my word for it - crypto is not my field.

[Möller14] Möller, Bodo; Duong, Thai; Kotowicz, 
Krzysztof, "This POODLE Bites: Exploiting The SSL 
3.0 Fallback" (September 2014). <https://www.openssl.org/~bodo/ssl-poodle.pdf>



Bob


At 19:23 06/03/2015, Martin Thomson wrote:
>On 6 March 2015 at 11:05, Bob Briscoe <bob.briscoe@bt.com> wrote:
> > Why does padding have to be filled with zeros? There are good cryptographic
> > reasons for not requiring this.
>
>Remember POODLE, I think that the opposite is true.  Also c.f. IND-CCA
>(and IND-CCA2).

________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe,                                                  BT