Re: [IPsec] revisiting 3DES and -graveyard

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Tue, 21 April 2020 17:43 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75A223A0885 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:43:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
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 QjQFWVjAHRQv for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:43:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F2533A0884 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:43:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4969rc0Q8WzF7f; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:42:56 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1587490976; bh=9q+DtdPunks3haMuyi1HYM/nFRnlZECl4rXpa1PKmyI=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=arm012iTW9jUJ0eqlyXIm8nLOuI9xwiCWegCZU/Pia0VXLQqoTKwe4789inlbKIm/ FqlXqgqKYveIX+dcryzHkWwcrxwnYq1u7a/u/VPRv5Uq9E5/oWWz48em30OiVfnm+x yV1Y5PO1W4x4o8f2WdO8wCW7BMsK+54wi81hxEWo=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vVn9Jz4RSdqA; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:42:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [76.10.157.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:42:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A7333600125C; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 13:42:53 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A36A566B25; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 13:42:53 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 13:42:53 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Dan Brown <danibrown@blackberry.com>
cc: Robert Moskowitz <rgm-sec@htt-consult.com>, Tero Kivinen <kivinen@iki.fi>, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>, "ipsec@ietf.org" <ipsec@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <e110327cce334e84971d2da6d8b36d5b@blackberry.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.2004211338460.17038@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <20200415021321.GI88064@mit.edu> <24215.701.417106.744293@fireball.acr.fi> <ee364387-6866-abdb-dd0a-0d788aae74a3@htt-consult.com> <e110327cce334e84971d2da6d8b36d5b@blackberry.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/InejUhw4cy6BHFms2KM_GZ2-ROA>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] revisiting 3DES and -graveyard
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 17:43:04 -0000

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020, Dan Brown wrote:

> [DB] Last week, I looked up what NIST documents say about 3DES.
> https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-131a/rev-2/final
> If I read them correctly, this document implies something like:
> - NO: new deployment of 3DES
> - OK: old deployment of 3DES encryption, until 2023, then NO more 3DES
> encryption.
> - OK: old deployment of 3DES decryption (e.g. to decrypt archived stuff).
> Not sure how much IPSec wants to follow NIST.  Presumably they do for 3DES,
> since 3DES is NIST's?
> The text below sounds to me like IPSec is already trying to do something along
> the NIST guidelines. (So, info above I wrote above is already well-known to
> IPSec.)

There is also the SP800-77 rev 1 draft "Guide for IPsec"

https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.800-77r1-draft.pdf

Which puts 3DES (TDEA) into the "Legacy" category.

It also states:

 	When migrating from IKEv1 to IKEv2, an upgrade of the algorithms
 	used is strongly recommended. 3DES, MD5, SHA-1 and DH Group
 	2 and 5 should not be used.



 	The Triple DES (3DES) encryption algorithm is no longer
 	recommended. It is much slower than AES-GCM and AES-CBC,
 	and it requires more frequent rekeying to avoid birthday attacks
 	due to its smaller block size of 64 bits.

Paul