Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] token-based greasing / initial packet protection (#3166)

Kazuho Oku <> Wed, 30 October 2019 05:07 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3A2212003E for <>; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 22:07:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8
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_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 3H6du0gsHbXJ for <>; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 22:07:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4257E1200E3 for <>; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 22:07:57 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 22:07:56 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=pf2014; t=1572412076; bh=X0/C90vDFFrHszq7yBeI8zi3EVj75sZOgBWQEz1M87k=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=a3c85R3ZSIaZZ1qTGH/mgiCvc7l/wZB9k1UOYI7ObiAde2sCQyxIDYg+RgM8cRu4Q MSMfYaqu+T7vTXaAWHa+lfKUNkfCA/h2Cm3EJCF8sIVn/zy8J/1hvnEdMtelj2aqVM wSGx4w4U6wL7O+NZfyo3l7HSaScCYakFQWhCMgRI=
From: Kazuho Oku <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3166/review/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] token-based greasing / initial packet protection (#3166)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5db91aac4a2aa_59973fac55ccd968633a4"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: kazuho
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: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 05:08:00 -0000

kazuho commented on this pull request.

> @@ -3940,6 +4007,19 @@ described in {{QUIC-TLS}}.  This protection does not provide confidentiality or
 integrity against on-path attackers, but provides some level of protection
 against off-path attackers.
+Additionally, the token is accompanied by a checksum.  This is because when a

We need Token Checksum so that the server can easily determine if there was a bit flip on the wire when it receives an invalid token.

The PR (up until of 7eded0a) requires the server to drop the packet if there was a bit flip on the wire. OTOH, if it was an unusable token (rather than a bit flip), the server responds with a VN. This distinction is necessary to prevent bit flips from being mis-detected as an downgrade attack (see

That said, I agree that this change is intrusive. Considering that we need to require certain properties for the token (see, we might as well state that a NEW_TOKEN token should be generated in a way that the server can detect bit flips even it has lost the keys to decrypt the token. In practice, that can be easily achieved by attaching CRC32 (or zero-key GMAC).

But finally, this entire discussion is based on the assumption that we need a downgrade path, which @martinthomson disputes in

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