[tcpinc] We need MTI symmetric algorithms too!
Daniel B Giffin <dbg@scs.stanford.edu> Tue, 24 October 2017 18:08 UTC
Return-Path: <dbg@scs.stanford.edu>
X-Original-To: tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2D4C1386F3 for <tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Oct 2017 11:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 SP1Y1_X_pzEO for <tcpinc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Oct 2017 11:08:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from market.scs.stanford.edu (www.scs.stanford.edu [IPv6:2001:470:806d:1::9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CC23137ED6 for <tcpinc@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Oct 2017 11:08:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from market.scs.stanford.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by market.scs.stanford.edu (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id v9OI8IbR035760 for <tcpinc@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Oct 2017 11:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from dbg@localhost) by market.scs.stanford.edu (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id v9OI8IVs046978 for tcpinc@ietf.org; Tue, 24 Oct 2017 11:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 11:08:18 -0700
From: Daniel B Giffin <dbg@scs.stanford.edu>
To: tcpinc <tcpinc@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20171024180818.GA82777@scs.stanford.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpinc/LXghNX6gII_44Kv0OrKL1a7InnE>
Subject: [tcpinc] We need MTI symmetric algorithms too!
X-BeenThere: tcpinc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Working group mailing list for TCP Increased Security \(tcpinc\)" <tcpinc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpinc>, <mailto:tcpinc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpinc/>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpinc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpinc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc>, <mailto:tcpinc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 18:08:21 -0000
Somehow we overlooked this: the tcpcrypt document does not
currently mandate that implementations support any
particular symmetric (AEAD) algorithms.
We need to make something mandatory-to-implement, of course,
in order to ensure that compliant implementations can talk
to each other.
We propose this disposition for the three algorithms
currently specified for tcpcrypt:
MUST: AES128-GCM
SHOULD: AES256-GCM
SHOULD: CHACHA20_POLY1305
This is the arrangement TLS 1.3 uses as well.
Please comment as soon as possible if you have any concerns
with this approach.
Thanks,
daniel
- [tcpinc] We need MTI symmetric algorithms too! Daniel B Giffin
- Re: [tcpinc] We need MTI symmetric algorithms too! Black, David