[TLS] DoS risks from draft-vkrasnov-tls-jumpstart-00

Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com> Fri, 15 May 2015 02:38 UTC

Return-Path: <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 243471A1B4C for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 May 2015 19:38:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pS9CChY4lHrX for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 May 2015 19:38:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x235.google.com (mail-wi0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D65891A1ADF for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 May 2015 19:37:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wicnf17 with SMTP id nf17so118866802wic.1 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 May 2015 19:37:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=a81xJcz9m7UEqFn2WtGLG+51ikXIoX0NuTs2Zznkn9c=; b=qN4DHOEy/RyTEz9DSzYfqKYyBQoIUzom3WsftpAjGexQEBgjgzlfTuyZyYyph5mWc1 B3h9ko1KBTDH73UZR+C0L6SUq0uLbDiJqutDf+3f+n36InZOZj0JwDpWBRjsXrX4w4PQ l4M1F6O/9S66iBRu4q0lmOKkir8agcB50/EowPwtVy50hCFuu7F3g0oHmvrxYJj3x0EI cL4mc8bqyb/iZ/si4xCju+1+v4Obi5OP460t28O7oKYEQyh4Rx81RBZAItWB0NNV5qlH 53YQtOQ1QpBCQHxh8G3pLLIcJ/KxUJy4f4UU/OhZixqdLaLmbXZzWYeP4W6IJ0ngPmqf 6wnA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id lw4mr4887162wjb.94.1431657478657; Thu, 14 May 2015 19:37:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Thu, 14 May 2015 19:37:58 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 19:37:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CACsn0c=0XMyzQ4DOVYo9sxSfMheHGmQy14txUJMH71Y_nCPLpg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
To: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/--xCbmtSA076QT1cfFnLo6gor2s>
Subject: [TLS] DoS risks from draft-vkrasnov-tls-jumpstart-00
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 02:38:01 -0000

Dear all,

I'd like to explain some of the ways in which
draft-vkrasnov-tls-jumpstart may provide opportunity for mischief. The
first, and most obvious, is that responses are considerably larger
than requests, leading to amplification. The second is that each
request creates state that is supposed to be stored on the server,
leading to exhaustion of server resources. There does not appear to be
a cookie mechanism to mitigate this problem.

For resumed connections these problems are much less serious. It may
be that resumption only is a better fit for this approach to latency

Watson Ladd