IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [kitten] WGLC on draft-ietf-kitten-aes-cts-hmac-sha2-06

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Fri, 17 April 2015 19:06 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1F331B2F87 for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.666
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.666 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=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 ML0O79OyILRK for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a86.g.dreamhost.com (sub4.mail.dreamhost.com [69.163.253.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 244021B2F7F for <kitten@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a86.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a86.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07893360094; Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=cryptonector.com; bh=6wy1cIEsE0buPE ToaNtAAa6iJQ0=; b=V21nKhcyTnRWy/0oz9vckxytSLKq6hm79uopIUBMwTLQAb 2KxA/9aMB1LSQaLIaeXYJHmJ/bEtBNN9vYGsnRmQ+eTnUdyoy6ASiAUkBj2v5pHG 7mHvzQwSTiobYnUFmT6XA9hr6Wwv8NdZ6QTpLpvTxA6adEHJIPXau+rDpr3Bg=
Received: from localhost (108-207-244-174.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net [108.207.244.174]) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a86.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 57F50360093; Fri, 17 Apr 2015 12:06:15 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 14:06:14 -0500
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@MIT.EDU>
Message-ID: <20150417190613.GH13041@localhost>
References: <alpine.GSO.1.10.1503301227280.22210@multics.mit.edu> <551D6C35.4080108@mit.edu> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1504081626110.22210@multics.mit.edu> <5525B044.8070509@mit.edu> <5526CDBA.3030102@secure-endpoints.com> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1504171427150.22210@multics.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.GSO.1.10.1504171427150.22210@multics.mit.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/kitten/8H4gREWN-CqvZryYLjQuwcZ-zAA>
Cc: kitten@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [kitten] WGLC on draft-ietf-kitten-aes-cts-hmac-sha2-06
X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation <kitten.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/kitten>, <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/kitten/>
List-Post: <mailto:kitten@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten>, <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 19:06:17 -0000

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 02:35:42PM -0400, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Apr 2015, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
> > raised are significant.   Do we have independent review from trusted
> > cryptographers?  I'm not one so will not try to review the math.
> 
> I don't believe there was explicit "independent cryptographer" review at
> the time you wrote this.  ("Does Nico count as a cryptographer?")

"Decidedly not."

However, we have authorities we can quote as to:

 - the safety of the confounded CTS construction (which isn't new here)

 - the safety of the HMAC truncation (which isn't new here)

 - the safety of encrypt-then-MAC (which is new here for Kerberos)

 - the safety of HMAC with SHA-2 functions (we need only that they be a
   good PRF) (which is new here, of course, for Kerberos anyways)

What controversies are there?

Nico
--

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email