Re: [pkix] How do we differentiate authentic servers from proxies performing TLS interception?

mrex@sap.com (Martin Rex) Thu, 12 November 2015 16:38 UTC

Return-Path: <mrex@sap.com>
X-Original-To: pkix@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pkix@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6552A1B2FF3 for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 08:38:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 W9Xa7rHyic6k for <pkix@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 08:38:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpde01.smtp.sap-ag.de (smtpde01.smtp.sap-ag.de [155.56.68.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE6F91B2B85 for <pkix@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 08:38:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail05.wdf.sap.corp (mail05.sap.corp [194.39.131.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtpde01.smtp.sap-ag.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 574992AF3E; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 17:38:11 +0100 (CET)
X-purgate-ID: 152705::1447346291-00006F99-E675E94B/0/0
X-purgate-size: 589
X-purgate: clean
X-purgate: This mail is considered clean (visit http://www.eleven.de for further information)
X-purgate-Ad: Categorized by eleven eXpurgate (R) http://www.eleven.de
X-purgate-type: clean
X-SAP-SPAM-Status: clean
Received: from ld9781.wdf.sap.corp (ld9781.wdf.sap.corp [10.21.82.193]) by mail05.wdf.sap.corp (Postfix) with ESMTP id F126440494; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 17:38:10 +0100 (CET)
Received: by ld9781.wdf.sap.corp (Postfix, from userid 10159) id E8F351A368; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 17:38:10 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <BY2PR09MB1094EA71ADDC83440AE82F2AE120@BY2PR09MB109.namprd09.prod.outlook.com>
To: "Miller, Timothy J." <tmiller@mitre.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 17:38:10 +0100 (CET)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL125 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-Id: <20151112163810.E8F351A368@ld9781.wdf.sap.corp>
From: mrex@sap.com (Martin Rex)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pkix/XM-64VbQL8qxEjvu4fyy_aAANK0>
Cc: PKIX <pkix@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [pkix] How do we differentiate authentic servers from proxies performing TLS interception?
X-BeenThere: pkix@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: mrex@sap.com
List-Id: PKIX Working Group <pkix.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pkix>, <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pkix/>
List-Post: <mailto:pkix@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pkix>, <mailto:pkix-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 16:38:14 -0000

Miller, Timothy J. wrote:
>> How do we differentiate authentic servers from proxies performing TLS
>> interception?
> 
> What would be the point?  You're going to accept a legitimate MitM
> (e.g., corporate security) and a malicious MitM won't use the extension.

Just for the record, corporate security performing MitM on TLS connections
of human user's browsers is *NOT* legitimate in Europe, it is clearly
*OUTSIDE* of the legal wiggle room of 2002/58/EC for EU member states,
and it has been a criminal offense (up to 5 years in prison)
in Germany since 2004.


-Martin