Re: [MLS] protections for MLS "handshake" messages

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[e-mail]>]

On Thu 2018-07-19 13:39:16 -0400, Joseph Lorenzo Hall wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 12:45 PM Daniel Kahn Gillmor
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> In today's session, there seemed to be an open question that wasn't
>> explicitly addressed, so i wanted to raise it on the list.
>>
>> for lack of a better term, we're dividing MLS messages into
>> "application" messages and "handshake" messages.  (i think we need
>> a better term for "handshake", but i'll use it here for consistency with
>> the current discussion)
>
> What about "content" and "keying" messages as new names?

I'm maybe a little reluctant to use "content", because it seems too
generic, and too allusive to the elusive "content/metadata" boundary.
But i'd be fine with "application" and "keying" as the nomenclature.

But I'm more interested in what people think about protecting these
messages (or even the distinction between the two categories of message)
from the DS itself.  Is there a reason that we need to expose to the DS
that keying updates are happening?

     --dkg