IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] Summarizing identity change discussion so far

David-Sarah Hopwood <david-sarah@jacaranda.org> Fri, 18 December 2009 05:48 UTC

Return-Path: <djhopwood@googlemail.com>
X-Original-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A15713A6A30 for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:48:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r-ucfUkWDqYX for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:48:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ew0-f214.google.com (mail-ew0-f214.google.com [209.85.219.214]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17E1F3A68D4 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:48:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ewy6 with SMTP id 6so104305ewy.29 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:48:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:content-type; bh=4Zw3TJm7Qk0vDMQoFdEbYeUL8fzdzk18zZ0rG8AmaqY=; b=p4do5AstDiOy/ydHG2DLvVICjFOoUOLoZfLyp8HoAZRJaV0oRpBCj5ZFCH8igg5/V7 rXe+vyyk7mioxg1dEGosrIijcTyl8OnnRMFOlWNZKfx1ChpY53nOdIrOhC9gSam0h6Nc q1vYKiCgjtWrQp+Cr58rr2pnZXqnTbSd/xRsI=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type; b=PNmfh6A00K0jjj0Qvka8gnIHb0fVS8XFDrNnenvGQWerunD09nYYCGBlA+umiCbAod uO75EG2KntX+ZhG6/2VEFVSBkc8iCc5lGSykacUocgyl9fjb2fRbWvrt9ngyNQ/KDQdA 5Z4mdwqb/AdLMnkRWgsfY1B+m8E1o3M+v0okw=
Received: by 10.213.43.195 with SMTP id x3mr9954400ebe.19.1261115311977; Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:48:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?192.168.0.2? (5e058d2d.bb.sky.com [94.5.141.45]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 14sm1710026ewy.15.2009.12.17.21.48.30 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:48:31 -0800 (PST)
Sender: David-Sarah Hopwood <djhopwood@googlemail.com>
Message-ID: <4B2B1770.3090004@jacaranda.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 05:47:28 +0000
From: David-Sarah Hopwood <david-sarah@jacaranda.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.8.1.3) Gecko/20070326 Thunderbird/2.0.0.0 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: tls@ietf.org
References: <Acp35q+5MB/IK2o8TM+TSRCqs64JxA==> <808FD6E27AD4884E94820BC333B2DB774F31A4FD08@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com> <6b9359640912171337j7ed5be63gf431e0fb12070944@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <6b9359640912171337j7ed5be63gf431e0fb12070944@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig6275D907DFDE3C3E5956664D"
Subject: Re: [TLS] Summarizing identity change discussion so far
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
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/listinfo/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, 18 Dec 2009 05:48:51 -0000

Kyle Hamilton wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:13 AM,  <Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com> wrote:
>> (wearing Area Director hat)
>>
>> - We recommend that TLS libraries SHOULD provide identity matching
>> (with memcmp, abort handshake if changed) functionality to
>> applications, and SHOULD allow applications to enable/disable this
>> functionality.
> 
> No, identity matching SHOULD be done in accordance with PKIX.

Strongly disagree. If implementations try to do identity matching that
is any more complicated than memcmp then they *will* get it wrong; see
<http://www.ioactive.com/pdfs/PKILayerCake.pdf> for evidence.

-- 
David-Sarah Hopwood  ⚥  http://davidsarah.livejournal.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email