Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Padding overhead in DNS over QUIC scenarios (#3523)

MikkelFJ <> Sat, 14 March 2020 08:28 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CB593A08E4 for <>; Sat, 14 Mar 2020 01:28:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.008
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.008 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9lXxYoleQ8Tm for <>; Sat, 14 Mar 2020 01:28:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 16DDB3A08DE for <>; Sat, 14 Mar 2020 01:28:22 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2020 01:28:21 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1584174502; bh=7bh2mLkgtjKIQDzpK4A0TvxJvfua9n0j4nnmkkrO2Es=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=oWW48yTAY48fHBHfxOtqQSf4jlwNQPYK5yMZmGegCQi4Ggm0sd2ooyDzn1lWzdFx6 8tal3XayHVNE+8uEZUQXL3UzqylxjxouJVTkjztws9Z3hNd2kS9Rzg32Dg6/5zfIlM M/Sz55U/KyfsG1RHilb42p3Wffge9PQ0TGeyAdsI=
From: MikkelFJ <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3523/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Padding overhead in DNS over QUIC scenarios (#3523)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5e6c95a5e69b4_6e763fe66b2cd968357593"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: mikkelfj
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2020 08:28:25 -0000

Initially I would say that 0-RTT would not need padding because the token is validated. However, if the server cannot trivially defend against cloned tokens it is a different matter. Multiple clients can sit behind the same NAT in an attack so the IP address need not even change. The token can also be stolen by observation on a compromised LAN.

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: