Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem?
Ben Smyth <research@bensmyth.com> Sun, 27 September 2020 20:53 UTC
Return-Path: <research@bensmyth.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A13043A0CBC for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Sep 2020 13:53:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=bensmyth.com
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 mG9_VdNW1Hin for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Sep 2020 13:53:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 3.smtp.34sp.com (3.smtp.34sp.com [IPv6:2a00:1ee0:2:5::2eb7:903]) (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 440FF3A0CB5 for <tls@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Sep 2020 13:53:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpauth5.mailarray.34sp.com (lvs5.34sp.com [46.183.13.73]) by 3.smtp.34sp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4448B6805A7 for <tls@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Sep 2020 21:53:28 +0100 (BST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bensmyth.com; s=dkim; t=1601240008; bh=6lmG5jA31fQV48FTfzDSD5B7nQEZuPsTs31WTrhcLcY=; h=References:In-Reply-To:Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc; b=ZWZ6ysA0aSajZzOp45e4uUKvuUIivoK77n5UtFjVJr2Ml/ibvCEPiz2Va2BywjuJR wl8P6uj63GDbq3Vk9/kub2QRg9a4oIQGIcIo+eacz9K+bA0wruJYH8VjJT2OchSPTz kN0rL3yQiy3KHgsdLknKIS24dG7TsTlm8Zc9qSKQ=
Received: from mail-vs1-f53.google.com ([209.85.217.53]:46074) by smtpauth5.mailarray.34sp.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <research@bensmyth.com>) id 1kMdfk-00042p-3V for tls@ietf.org; Sun, 27 Sep 2020 21:53:28 +0100
Received: by mail-vs1-f53.google.com with SMTP id e23so4665617vsk.2 for <tls@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Sep 2020 13:53:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530ePKYaHUVf3wc4BMqUPGq2BF4j4JxPc5u4xJZ+N780T5uzUgbT F+FVGOZ4MayxRTJULgZZh7mtSRvnYnQa4GMzZdY=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy8YEpvOSTy2ztRsFexUukCZDYnOQh75T86fAgZuHNBvHqMo7Q2kcZYn1kqRXQZI/G/KxTHdRSc92pTZzE9LEM=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:1385:: with SMTP id 127mr4841527vst.31.1601240006824; Sun, 27 Sep 2020 13:53:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <0c31f2d6-5f8e-2fd6-9a1a-08b7902dd135@pobox.com>
In-Reply-To: <0c31f2d6-5f8e-2fd6-9a1a-08b7902dd135@pobox.com>
Reply-To: research@bensmyth.com
From: Ben Smyth <research@bensmyth.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2020 22:53:15 +0200
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CA+_8xu0TvfHkvL0jRsP8+fiXD=7s5CyPK31GhRv9oEnMJQsFFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+_8xu0TvfHkvL0jRsP8+fiXD=7s5CyPK31GhRv9oEnMJQsFFQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael D'Errico <mike-list@pobox.com>
Cc: "<tls@ietf.org>" <tls@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ce97c105b051bd7d"
X-Authenticated-As: research@bensmyth.com
X-OriginalSMTPIP: 209.85.217.53
X-34spcom-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-34spcom-MailScanner-ID: 4448B6805A7.A3076
X-34spcom-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-34spcom-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-10.1, required 6.5, autolearn=disabled, DKIM_SIGNED 0.10, DKIM_VALID -0.10, DKIM_VALID_AU -0.10, HTML_MESSAGE 0.00, SPF_PASS -0.00, X34P_ALREADY_MARKED_SPAM 1.00, X34SP_ALLOW_GMAIL_EVEN_IF_BLACKLISTED -10.00, X34SP_OVERRIDE -1.00)
X-34spcom-MailScanner-From: research@bensmyth.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/9lu-oeGwxZcgUZNAb1KqsLEuh78>
Subject: Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem?
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 27 Sep 2020 20:53:36 -0000
The client will reject the server's ServerHello in your example.
- [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? Ben Smyth
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? Richard Barnes
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] HelloRetryRequest question (was Re: TLS… Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? Hannes Tschofenig
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? Watson Ladd
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? Rob Sayre
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? Martin Thomson
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? Ben Smyth
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? mrex
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? Martin Thomson
- Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 Problem? Michael D'Errico
- [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhile? … Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Martin Thomson
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Hannes.Tschofenig
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Salz, Rich
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Benjamin Kaduk
- [TLS] HelloRetryRequest question (was Re: TLS 1.3… Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] HelloRetryRequest question (was Re: TLS… Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] HelloRetryRequest question (was Re: TLS… Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Rob Sayre
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Salz, Rich
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Nick Harper
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Michael D'Errico
- [TLS] Client attacks on stateless HRR? (was Re: I… Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Nick Lamb
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] Is stateless HelloRetryRequest worthwhi… Luke Curley