IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OAUTH-WG] TLS 1.2

Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com> Tue, 16 August 2011 19:55 UTC

Return-Path: <eran@hueniverse.com>
X-Original-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: oauth@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2705B22830B for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 12:55:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, SUBJ_ALL_CAPS=2.077]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QILbCm4ubmth for <oauth@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 12:55:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p3plex1out01.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (p3plex1out01.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [72.167.180.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id A85A622830A for <oauth@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 12:55:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 27142 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2011 19:56:44 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.ex1.secureserver.net) (72.167.180.21) by p3plex1out01.prod.phx3.secureserver.net with SMTP; 16 Aug 2011 19:56:44 -0000
Received: from P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET ([10.6.135.19]) by P3PW5EX1HT003.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET ([72.167.180.21]) with mapi; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 12:56:31 -0700
From: Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com>
To: Justin Richer <jricher@mitre.org>, Rob Richards <rrichards@cdatazone.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 12:55:16 -0700
Thread-Topic: [OAUTH-WG] TLS 1.2
Thread-Index: AcxcTdVcH0c7rW0kQMaAT3XKQ9uqQwAAIzbg
Message-ID: <90C41DD21FB7C64BB94121FBBC2E7234502498D1B0@P3PW5EX1MB01.EX1.SECURESERVER.NET>
References: <4E458571.1070500@cdatazone.org> <4E4AC6BA.2090007@cdatazone.org> <1313524116.13419.81.camel@ground>
In-Reply-To: <1313524116.13419.81.camel@ground>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "oauth@ietf.org" <oauth@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] TLS 1.2
X-BeenThere: oauth@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: OAUTH WG <oauth.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/oauth>
List-Post: <mailto:oauth@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth>, <mailto:oauth-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 19:55:56 -0000

We should relax it. Just need someone to propose new language.

EHL

> -----Original Message-----
> From: oauth-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:oauth-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Justin Richer
> Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 12:49 PM
> To: Rob Richards
> Cc: oauth@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] TLS 1.2
> 
> As I recall, the logic of the group here was something like:
> 
> "We want transport-layer encryption, so let's grab the latest version of that
> around, which looks to be TLS 1.2"
> 
> With that logic in mind, this relaxation makes sense to me. Does anyone
> remember this requirement differently?
> 
>  -- Justin
>     (who admittedly couldn't tell the difference between SSL and TLS)
> 
> On Tue, 2011-08-16 at 15:36 -0400, Rob Richards wrote:
> > I wanted to follow up on this and see if there was any consideration
> > to relaxing this requirement. Can someone actually point me to a
> > compliant implementation using TLS 1.2 because after looking at a
> > number of them, I have yet to find one that does.
> >
> > Rob
> >
> > On 8/12/11 3:56 PM, Rob Richards wrote:
> > > The latest draft shows TLS 1.2 as a MUST (sections 3.1 and 3.2).
> > > Based on a thread about this from last year I was under the
> > > impression that it was going to be relaxed to a SHOULD with most
> > > likely TLS 1.0 (or posssibly SSLv3) as a MUST. I think it's a bit
> > > unrealistic to require
> > > 1.2 when many systems out there can't support it. IMO this is going
> > > to be a big stumbling block for people to implement a compliant
> > > OAuth system. Even PCI doesn't require 1.2.
> > >
> > > Rob
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > OAuth mailing list
> > > OAuth@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OAuth mailing list
> > OAuth@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OAuth mailing list
> OAuth@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email