IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [multipathtcp] Replacing SHA-1 with SHA-256

Olivier Bonaventure <Olivier.Bonaventure@uclouvain.be> Wed, 15 March 2017 22:17 UTC

Return-Path: <olivier.bonaventure@uclouvain.be>
X-Original-To: multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B40E129C4A for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.32
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.32 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-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=uclouvain.be
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 G8qEfehoKooA for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:17:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp1.sgsi.ucl.ac.be (smtp.sgsi.ucl.ac.be [130.104.5.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCDE9129C2F for <multipathtcp@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:17:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mbpobo.local (unknown [87.66.241.84]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: obonaventure@smtp1.sgsi.ucl.ac.be) by smtp1.sgsi.ucl.ac.be (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CF6E167E032; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 23:17:19 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.9.2 smtp1.sgsi.ucl.ac.be CF6E167E032
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=uclouvain.be; s=selucl; t=1489616240; bh=3pQQSN0lJXlT706SOfT92t5EtwLjFRG41gmfWct5bzw=; h=Reply-To:Subject:References:To:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=qZlRaeb1Oes3mMwCJtlmiKZWoc4Hqp/3008i7Ce1MnzqX7tE/onB8mEeBvsRbAYgt lDXSHcvccWL7UwnhmrWDJC1eRcBEDXMVCZRQxYGPJNk5bgjGGeCyqLPUmDS6waQp9W T2X/+aWwjTc/cz8QXCIQ/WVZrblybpiIExMqoVT4=
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99.2 at smtp-1
Reply-To: Olivier.Bonaventure@uclouvain.be
References: <5254457A-9922-4E02-8A60-18E712A3EE5D@gmail.com> <ED4CCFD3-35DB-4EE5-B4C0-6F80D590580C@apple.com>
To: Greg Greenway <ggreenway@apple.com>, Alan Ford <alan.ford@gmail.com>
Cc: multipathtcp@ietf.org
From: Olivier Bonaventure <Olivier.Bonaventure@uclouvain.be>
Message-ID: <d7923793-51de-a214-5cbc-b610ca79ac2f@uclouvain.be>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 23:17:19 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <ED4CCFD3-35DB-4EE5-B4C0-6F80D590580C@apple.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Sgsi-Spamcheck: SASL authenticated,
X-SGSI-Information:
X-SGSI-MailScanner-ID: CF6E167E032.A46B2
X-SGSI-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-SGSI-From: olivier.bonaventure@uclouvain.be
X-SGSI-Spam-Status: No
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/multipathtcp/iCtbW0vaGGIEplumpojufItmklw>
Subject: Re: [multipathtcp] Replacing SHA-1 with SHA-256
X-BeenThere: multipathtcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-path extensions for TCP <multipathtcp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/multipathtcp>, <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/multipathtcp/>
List-Post: <mailto:multipathtcp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp>, <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 22:17:29 -0000

On 15/03/17 22:31, Greg Greenway wrote:
> Would this change also set a different bit in the MP_CAPABLE option for
> crypto algorithm negotiation (eg set bit G for SHA-256, instead of the
> current bit H for SHA-1)?


No, this idea is that SHA-256 would apply to RFC6824bis, i.e. the 
standard track version of MPTCP while SHA-1 applies to RFC6824

Olivier
>> On Mar 13, 2017, at 1:44 PM, Alan Ford <alan.ford@gmail.com
>> <mailto:alan.ford@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> It’s been flagged up off-list that given SHA-1 is being deprecated, we
>> should probably look to replace it with SHA-256 in 6824bis. Even
>> though we use truncations of these hashes, the benefits gained from
>> SHA-256 are maybe not significant, but does mean that legacy SHA-1
>> code would not be required by implementors.
>>
>> Does anyone have any concerns about such a change? We do not believe
>> it would be significant and could be a direct drop-in in the places
>> where SHA-1 is referenced and used today.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alan
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> multipathtcp mailing list
>> multipathtcp@ietf.org <mailto:multipathtcp@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> multipathtcp mailing list
> multipathtcp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email