IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

ekr <notifications@github.com> Fri, 28 August 2020 17:20 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 0DB6D3A0E8B for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 10:20:35 -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 2z4GrEuvn_8C for <quic-issues@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 10:20:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out-20.smtp.github.com (out-20.smtp.github.com [192.30.252.203]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D07753A0E87 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 10:20:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from github-lowworker-c53a806.ac4-iad.github.net (github-lowworker-c53a806.ac4-iad.github.net [10.52.23.45]) by smtp.github.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D64A8E1E09 for <quic-issues@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 10:20:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1598635232; bh=fNL05D8qOij2KlGgn/O1n/kO+75RIH5jJ72McCsC5+w=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=PD01q9pMRt4FqUWKCYmoRrGiBG3G9jhi65OeMFPqSCFqzmKkFlf/BqDZpXKBMdS0d RL7kuXAEGXvK8gmsQ0N/J0JECqXvWgAg0RU0Cm3+liJQKw+XGIPhIXeVtHr2p1BE6Q /AhvhZGX++47C3JVRxd8EB0U58srKrr9Bf1pN+GQ=
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 10:20:32 -0700
From: ekr <notifications@github.com>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <reply+AFTOJKZJDKLUNEGNNHB3RUN5KUO6BEVBNHHCQTEK7Y@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/477901153@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_5f493ce0c6035_782c19642435e5"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: ekr
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/pot9pD-nQtfxGhTQCk0Yxzfr7PM>
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: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 17:20:35 -0000

@ekr commented on 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

I don't object to this particular decision, but I would have assumed that you could *always* abort a connection whenever the peer violates a MUST. No?

-- 
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#discussion_r479437371

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email