Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] No reading of 1-RTT before the handshake is complete (#3224)

MikkelFJ <> Tue, 19 November 2019 09:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00408120857 for <>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 01:59:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.382
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.382 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, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_24=1.618, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, 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 RupqdDlRv5FD for <>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 01:59:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 443D4120829 for <>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 01:59:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 607DE66041C for <>; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 01:59:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1574157584; bh=U0zH2OQuAgN47Xb+76+18rK4g/FozFtKOwuuYQ/+S2o=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Q4RxujRo8QEkBW84d6urBiEiQ24z/i0ZEruAPwLlxcxDnzYoHTe7WBn3qP5K8b9wZ AZ7Ue4f7ahNR9r21zwc/z+WTa/OEIEJEUOiD6Uel6Fg1zAIhN7uj7CAeCTNQKkrinl xVrE6wP3nC3r2hHeDhywjw9c4ovvdGwRxiFXeV6g=
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 01:59:44 -0800
From: MikkelFJ <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3224/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] No reading of 1-RTT before the handshake is complete (#3224)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5dd3bd1051468_41c53fdb6f8cd964120414"; 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: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 09:59:47 -0000

I know this has been discussed before - but reading the text as it is I wonder:

the text mixes three different terms, seeming arbitrarily: decryption of 1-RTT, processing of 1-RTT, and reading 1-RTT packets, and not using the 1-RTT keys at all.

I can see how packets MUST not be processed ahead of time, but I don't see why the keys cannot be used to qualify the packets. In fact the text says you can store 1-RTT packets until ready, but how do you know they are indeed 1-RTT packets if you cannot use the keys in some form?

There is a related concern about timing attacks if you do not both decrypt and verify but if that is not topic here, and if it is a concern it should probably be mentioned or referenced.

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