IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] Pull Request: Removing the AEAD explicit IV

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Thu, 19 March 2015 04:12 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.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 DE8D21A8770 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 21:12:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 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, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 zjb8ic3zIFaf for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 21:12:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22b.google.com (mail-oi0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22b]) (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 CCE681A8993 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 21:10:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by oier21 with SMTP id r21so55578017oie.1 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 21:10:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=G6BclB6NT8uzFEfBsbIFR6OTpravF3bkomRNoGDPjTc=; b=HlxGVIh9RBSzwQZVzWDuDj3U5TIxzZg9npepIoCaZB3F86NHlJW4qDZSx46tEY6Vzg a9+n0Pnxcl+5GkOzcpAvVN+V2JHWSONupT4MEFsaIrE0fEmW7Lpbg/X17T3125/LAQ0a PjyNbL0F4+StnLELKiAesEJ4Z0YTatNV+1KT9ns6r8snjicUFfMfHwJ0PxeVOpabxyM6 65yflgdJlcCoqgeMEsyidPxQ1E3aWd9N6WsLCMVfTc7yKT7KbQ3Oob8P9pPDu1lZpQZ6 hYt2cUFfUOIDzAyIUxY8Q0Bpwuls205mlq+//fmNwqd6ucojgV4QHme36/JywgfDlHI+ BfAg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.97.41 with SMTP id dx9mr60381637obb.4.1426738208368; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 21:10:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.202.48.151 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Mar 2015 21:10:08 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAF6GDdbr57hVa4OD-wCfQtx46bo_D858V_25w8gTtd+M8OhzQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABcZeBPfasM5HmJaATLUHQKRgiSGCreJt1T=UoDBGCbcuzyW8Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAAF6GDdbr57hVa4OD-wCfQtx46bo_D858V_25w8gTtd+M8OhzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 21:10:08 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnV-H21xFFH=mUUFJH9QRtiHoTTv1SvfdJbc6GDy4EzC_Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Colm MacCárthaigh <colm@allcosts.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/8rPVlaNsyCbUq6DvtRkkYvOz2fw>
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Pull Request: Removing the AEAD explicit IV
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: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 04:12:59 -0000

On 18 March 2015 at 21:00, Colm MacCárthaigh <colm@allcosts.net> wrote:
> I don't object, but for the sake of debate I do want to ask how much
> deference we owe to RFC5116 here?

Only as much as we need to get the job done.  It establishes
terminology for a thing we use (i.e., the AEAD "API").

I don't see any reason not to use the term "nonce" as used in RFC
5116.  It's not imprecise in any way.  It's arguably more correct than
"IV", which has conflicting connotations.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email