Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Add Advice and Rules for CONN_CLOSE in Initial and Handshake (#1786)

[Kazuho Oku <[e-mail]>]

@ianswett 
> I think the sender text is fairly straightforward, but we have 3 options I'm aware of on the receiver side:
> 
> 1. Require implicit ACKs.
> 2. Instruct the receiver to ACK Initial encryption after receiving Handshake, but not process them.
> 3. Decide we don't care about injection attacks.

IIRC the discussion during the handshake redesign process was that we should not care about injection attacks, though the design allows stacks to implement countermeasures (see [TLS Handshake Messsages on QUIC; section 3.4](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fRsJqPinJl8N3b-bflDRV6auojfJLkxddT93j6SwHY8/edit))

For a middlebox, the easiest way of disrupting a handshake is to send a crafted Initial in response to the client's first flight. We do require the endpoints to implement protection for that. So I do not think there is a reason to care about injection attacks happening at a later moment.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/1786#issuecomment-425363631