IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Bound 0-to-1-RTT Transition (#2466)

MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com> Wed, 17 April 2019 19:07 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@github.com>
X-Original-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0412F12039D for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 12:07:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8 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_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=github.com
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 78crDwWfGvdx for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 12:07:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-7.smtp.github.com (out-7.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEE3F120363 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 12:07:31 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 12:07:30 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1555528050; bh=Plx4VGn/JHaae7D/0HljVm64fpfduq5/Hkvtzx2AW0U=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=fI0cE+q0OE+WCBAiqJvUWvv8aepmdbpOgBZBIV4J/UHWn1rLv7aR5cnEpC01Ik1yp NHRDjQUNQeHf6wzgJ8pd9m0r4wna242DqmFCeUrk4rPBkTR6hfN3ovSKIe0NQTptbP Ho98PhKGElfhxOP18D33RLMPJbP2nfzl5UmNmYes=
From: MikkelFJ <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+0166e4abddf91cfb6ac8e8c560e81357497997bbdab17a3392cebac4abf292a169ce1877f890@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2466/review/227943759@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2466@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2466@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Bound 0-to-1-RTT Transition (#2466)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5cb77972ab5d3_152f3fc056ecd9601840f4"; 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
X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: quic-issues@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic-issues/W2Vmz9yboQtP8tdsD4ZBnZOD_UY>
X-BeenThere: quic-issues@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <quic-issues.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic-issues/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic-issues@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic-issues>, <mailto:quic-issues-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 19:07:41 -0000

mikkelfj commented on this pull request.



> @@ -2631,7 +2641,10 @@ number 0.  Subsequent packets sent in the same packet number space MUST increase
 the packet number by at least one.
 
 0-RTT and 1-RTT data exist in the same packet number space to make loss recovery
-algorithms easier to implement between the two packet types.
+algorithms easier to implement between the two packet types.  However, a client
+MUST NOT continue sending 0-RTT packets after beginning to use 1-RTT packets.
+Servers MUST drop 0-RTT packets with greater packet numbers than the lowest
+packet number they have received in a 1-RTT packet.

Nooo: an attacker can replay old 0-RTT packets with higher packet numbers and force a close. The packets MUST be dropped.

However, I don't like the explicit drop requirement. It should happen automatically when the 0-RTT key is dropped. No reason for the server to keep track of packet numbers if the key drop is precise.

-- 
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/pull/2466#discussion_r276391448

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email