Re: [TLS] Accepting that other SNI name types will never work.

"Fossati, Thomas (Nokia - GB)" <thomas.fossati@nokia.com> Fri, 04 March 2016 07:15 UTC

Return-Path: <thomas.fossati@nokia.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9EFE1B345E for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 23:15:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 m29rdcxbRg6A for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 23:15:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpgre-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.23]) (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 C43CC1B345B for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 23:14:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fr711umx2.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.210.39]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 4E410F0C52BA; Fri, 4 Mar 2016 07:14:56 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.122]) by fr711umx2.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO-o) with ESMTP id u247EvCd008273 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 4 Mar 2016 07:14:57 GMT
Received: from FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr711wxchhub01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.111]) by fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id u247CRsq011871 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 4 Mar 2016 08:14:50 +0100
Received: from FR711WXCHMBA08.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.4.130]) by FR711WXCHHUB01.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.111]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Fri, 4 Mar 2016 08:06:09 +0100
From: "Fossati, Thomas (Nokia - GB)" <thomas.fossati@nokia.com>
To: Adam Langley <agl@imperialviolet.org>, "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [TLS] Accepting that other SNI name types will never work.
Thread-Index: AQHRdX12Q+nwt3mZlUq33/gRSAaAQ59IzOaA
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 07:06:09 +0000
Message-ID: <D2FEE434.6084F%thomas.fossati@alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <CAMfhd9WNHqfRH=M=_B7_apJ-r43fi8qoe-+VcDkrKPwwhkPR5A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMfhd9WNHqfRH=M=_B7_apJ-r43fi8qoe-+VcDkrKPwwhkPR5A@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.6.1.160122
x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.38]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: <D04AFA2417B4DD4E991DE9F18062EDBA@exchange.lucent.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/-5FS7nHrBwYA5dVUyJo3clFKmcA>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Accepting that other SNI name types will never work.
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 04 Mar 2016 07:15:01 -0000

Hi Adam,


On 03/03/2016 18:49, "TLS on behalf of Adam Langley" <tls-bounces@ietf.org
on behalf of agl@imperialviolet.org> wrote:
>The Server Name Indication (SNI) extension in TLS has a provision to
>provide names other than host names[1]. None have even been defined to
>my knowledge, but it's there.
>
>OpenSSL (and possibly others) have had a long-standing bug[2] (fixed
>in master) that means that different types of names will cause an
>error. To be clear: I live in a glass house and am not throwing
>stones; these things happen. However, it means that a huge fraction of
>the TLS deployment will not be able to accept a different name type
>should one ever be defined. (This issue might have been caused by the
>fact that the original[3] spec didn't define the extension in such a
>way that unknown name types could be skipped over.)
>
>Therefore we (i.e. BoringSSL, and thus Google) are proposing to give
>up on this and implement our parser such that the SNI extension is
>only allowed to contain a single host name value. (This is compatible
>with all known clients.) We're assuming that since this is already the
>de-facto reality that there will be little objection. I'm sending this
>mostly to record the fact so that, if someone tries to define a new
>name type in the future, they won't waste their time.
>
>If the community wishes to indicate a different type of name in the
>future, a new extension can be defined. This is already effectively
>the case because we wouldn't fight this level of incompatibility when
>there's any other option.
>
>(I think the lesson here is that protocols should have a single joint,
>and that it should be kept well oiled. For TLS, that means that
>extensions should have minimal extensionality in themselves and that
>we should generally rely on the main extensions mechanism for these
>sorts of things.)
>
>[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6066#section-3
>[2] 
>https://github.com/openssl/openssl/blob/OpenSSL_1_0_1-stable/ssl/t1_lib.c#
>L1066
>­ note that the data pointer is not updated.
>[3] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4366#section-3.1
>
>
>Cheers
>
>AGL
>
>-- 
>Adam Langley agl@imperialviolet.org https://www.imperialviolet.org
>
>_______________________________________________
>TLS mailing list
>TLS@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls