Re: [saag] [TLS] Lessons learned from TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1 deprecation

Peter Gutmann <> Tue, 01 October 2019 22:21 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8325C12021C; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 15:21:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.198
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YA-FvH7H1CrQ; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 15:21:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D520312012C; Tue, 1 Oct 2019 15:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;;; q=dns/txt; s=mail; t=1569968461; x=1601504461; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=OBwXXTvFGdujNPdEQQhTJo25/wKKhMEDSWkVB9evi8s=; b=AFp1IJYVwNcN9pdLK4fwXzonyldl1xEE4j2sQsQjYFIRM426ChW5RKtm elX7QkhYNcjvAPS6JcMlubludolHAUEmBF8eBDrj8SgeVcmqoR7HHChQ8 nfQJZnaXfCK0HAlPNMwwZdvwQZgvm8kQ8SVElC6ge7O8eDJqcKqKfHqku pKKmA81/qU+E4u7D2rTFsYtXbAGQfCDYTL7LOf2VKqr6LZaEehGXKxUlJ VgK4hyhcPxJBVqWjOtwiU65wKK7qnKwCa8WBEGSUc8qegtbXqJBWSJyEd cOFhKN9w/ywLDoV1/JleAbT7fKXBJUCn38axRwavj5L6A+rKhR5vl+EtE Q==;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,572,1559476800"; d="scan'208";a="90133194"
X-Ironport-Source: - Outgoing - Outgoing
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 02 Oct 2019 11:20:59 +1300
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 11:20:58 +1300
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1395.000; Wed, 2 Oct 2019 11:20:58 +1300
From: Peter Gutmann <>
To: "" <>, 'John Mattsson' <>, "" <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [TLS] Lessons learned from TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1 deprecation
Thread-Index: AQHVdGRuT2dEqLFcbEmEm2g+1AcjWadE9+mAgAFsGw8=
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 22:20:57 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>, <024b01d5785d$51b3d7d0$f51b8770$>
In-Reply-To: <024b01d5785d$51b3d7d0$f51b8770$>
Accept-Language: en-NZ, en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-NZ
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [saag] [TLS] Lessons learned from TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1 deprecation
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Advisory Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2019 22:21:03 -0000 <>; writes:

>IMHO the problem with deprecation is not in the IETF but rather with the deployments.
>PS: As Kathleen noted TLS 1.2 and DTLS 1.2 are perfectly fine if you follow
>RFC 7925/7525.

Maybe the text could be updated to have one section of text for the web and
one for everything else, since they're totally, totally different
environments.  I was at a meeting last week to discuss upgrade mechanisms for
some globally deployed infrastructure and they were looking at a 2-3 year time
window to start the upgrade process, with completion by 2030 at the latest.

That's not a typo for 2020, it's 2030.

So the text needs to acknowledge the two different operating environments, the
web where you can replace anything you want at a drop of a hat, and the rest
of the world where it takes serious effort to make the change.  Moving from
TLS 1.0 to TLS 1.2 with EMS/EtM/LTS within ten years, for the non-web world,
is a practical goal.  Moving to an entirely new protocol in that time frame
(TLS 1.3) probably isn't going to happen.