Re: [TLS] Reducing record expansion overhead allowance

["StJohns, Michael" <[e-mail]>]

The only other thing that hasn't been mentioned that was discussed at the
interim in Denver is padding for traffic analysis resistance. That could
hit 1k in size.  But since there's no proposal that's just a guess on size.


On Saturday, July 19, 2014, Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:

> https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/issues/55
>
> In TLS 1.2, we had the following maximum values:
>
> TLSPlaintext: 2^{14}
> TLSCompressed: 2^{14} + 1024
> TLSCiphertext: 2^{14} + 2048
>
> These overhead values allow for expansion in these transforms
> due to potential bad compression overhead or padding, etc.
>
> Wan-Teh Chang points out that we no longer have compression
> so there's no need to allow for 1024 bytes of expansion there.
>
> Minimally we should reduce the TLSCiphertext overhead to
> 2^{14} + 1024. Do people believe that we will have AEAD
> ciphers with 1024 bytes of expansion or should we reduce
> it further? I'm inclined to not re-judge that and just leave it
> at 2^{14} + 1024.
>
> Thoughts?
> -Ekr
>
>