IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Let server abort on post-Retry packet number reset (#3990)

Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com> Tue, 11 August 2020 20:25 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 B16DA3A0C74 for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 13:25:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.555
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.555 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, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 RWsRnq6iIgtY for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 13:25:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-18.smtp.github.com (out-18.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DCF13A0C67 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 13:25:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-1b8c660.ash1-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-1b8c660.ash1-iad.github.net [10.56.18.59]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89B5D340086 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Aug 2020 13:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1597177516; bh=dFFPdnMouZUmFTDJjktw+dQOHhBV49XzVtKgrXn0v9M=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=fz9e3M1qOwnEGfvon8g5XHbecMOE0ilsrXDZ8w+D70J6L4Ny/VCGZWGTJW/DYEchj OBch7R6sY5TBE+z1UabnwaDmqVBYn3Nl4ujdi3Gn0X0g1gwHEC3zUyaMrY6kOWMW8G FiFYqjwXq9LlWjFyqGXRPLinqhKblM2DcUe/jO4k=
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 13:25:16 -0700
From: Mike Bishop <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJK5BZOPW7MBTSDVPGZV5H3P2ZEVBNHHCQTEK7Y@reply.github.com>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <base-drafts@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3990/review/465401215@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3990@github.com>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3990@github.com>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Let server abort on post-Retry packet number reset (#3990)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5f32feac7a912_73a416f81891e3"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: MikeBishop
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/pUG1okw1DbdGS--n1Nv5Pv-mXqA>
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: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 20:25:19 -0000

@MikeBishop approved this pull request.



> @@ -4807,6 +4807,8 @@ responding to a Retry packet. However, the data sent in these packets could be
 different than what was sent earlier. Sending these new packets with the same
 packet number is likely to compromise the packet protection for those packets
 because the same key and nonce could be used to protect different content.
+A server MAY abort the connection if it detects that the client reset the

MAY or SHOULD abort if detects, but no requirement that it attempt to detect seems like a reasonable compromise.

-- 
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/3990#pullrequestreview-465401215

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email