Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Authenticate connection IDs (#3499)

Martin Thomson <> Tue, 12 May 2020 04:14 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC8073A0B79 for <>; Mon, 11 May 2020 21:14:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.269
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.269 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.173, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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 Yrh5suwS5Qsh for <>; Mon, 11 May 2020 21:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E63C3A0B6E for <>; Mon, 11 May 2020 21:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C192F6E06C8 for <>; Mon, 11 May 2020 21:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1589256866; bh=F7ZOo5EG+GB+qlPTrhlSus7fDWLbtXRj6Etc8rIUZ5A=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=QNcQUqgqnFyepBrlDKY1X+6mXMzfkLClu76LnEPiy2B4IFQDCpxjmur/E09qjIz31 kZxgdUqteflOTl7wBKa9Tr71uT+dcB3qrd4pWVegDBalYxGe7o+fJUBPcKqLHMV+Cg OBXsgVPevG90UbfAlmsFawW/gcUhqqgeQY32pDJQ=
Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 21:14:26 -0700
From: Martin Thomson <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3499/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Authenticate connection IDs (#3499)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5eba22a2b2213_33f53fbf56ecd95c7457f7"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: martinthomson
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, 12 May 2020 04:14:29 -0000

@martinthomson commented on this pull request.

> +first Initial packet it sent in the initial_source_connection_id transport
+parameter; see {{transport-parameter-definitions}}. A server includes the
+Destination Connection ID field from the first Initial packet it received from
+the client in the original_destination_connection_id transport parameter; if
+the server sent a Retry packet this refers to the first Initial packet received
+before sending the Retry packet. If it sends a Retry packet, a server also
+includes the Source Connection ID field from the Retry packet in the
+retry_source_connection_id transport parameter.
+The values provided by a peer for these transport parameters MUST match the
+values that an endpoint used in the Destination and Source Connection ID fields
+of Initial packets that it sent. Including connection ID values in transport
+parameters and verifying them ensures that that an attacker cannot influence
+the choice of connection ID for a successful connection by injecting packets
+carrying attacker-chosen connection IDs during the handshake. An endpoint MUST
+treat any of the following as a connection error of type PROTOCOL_VIOLATION:

I like that rationale.  I could also see my way to choose TRANSPORT_PARAMETER_ERROR.  We use that for transport parameters that are present when they are disallowed (like preferred_address from a client) in addition to obvious encoding problems, which suggests that you might implement this as `if transport_parameters.bad() then TRANSPORT_PARAMETER_ERROR`, but this validation does involve accessing external state, as you say, so a different code is fully justified.

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