Re: [TLS] draft-sullivan-tls-post-handshake-auth-00

Ilari Liusvaara <ilariliusvaara@welho.com> Mon, 08 August 2016 06:14 UTC

Return-Path: <ilariliusvaara@welho.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 082B312D688 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Aug 2016 23:14:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.147
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.147 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.247] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 uKLIEWgJoPT2 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Aug 2016 23:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from welho-filter3.welho.com (welho-filter3.welho.com [83.102.41.25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4B6912D550 for <TLS@ietf.org>; Sun, 7 Aug 2016 23:14:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by welho-filter3.welho.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D62610622; Mon, 8 Aug 2016 09:14:20 +0300 (EEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at pp.htv.fi
Received: from welho-smtp3.welho.com ([IPv6:::ffff:83.102.41.86]) by localhost (welho-filter3.welho.com [::ffff:83.102.41.25]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YveBlTQbZo8o; Mon, 8 Aug 2016 09:14:20 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from LK-Perkele-V2 (87-100-177-32.bb.dnainternet.fi [87.100.177.32]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by welho-smtp3.welho.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 372D72310; Mon, 8 Aug 2016 09:14:20 +0300 (EEST)
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 09:14:13 +0300
From: Ilari Liusvaara <ilariliusvaara@welho.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20160808061413.ylqaytfxxckted4j@LK-Perkele-V2.elisa-laajakaista.fi>
References: <CAOjisRyH6Fz-_FbOaE7gMK-WXQetP=R6hJwAevRdsMYVBv95uw@mail.gmail.com> <20160806172605.fqgtphnurlqzxfpo@LK-Perkele-V2.elisa-laajakaista.fi> <CABkgnnXOwS9Tgx06x3q99R2nU2TRR5aCo9oSPn21mTvTOtqpCQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnXOwS9Tgx06x3q99R2nU2TRR5aCo9oSPn21mTvTOtqpCQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.2-neo (2016-07-23)
Sender: ilariliusvaara@welho.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/AtCpQ-VjSmsewcYCKw9K_eAi1ZM>
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <TLS@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] draft-sullivan-tls-post-handshake-auth-00
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Mon, 08 Aug 2016 06:14:25 -0000

On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 11:19:39AM +1000, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 7 August 2016 at 03:26, Ilari Liusvaara <ilariliusvaara@welho.com> wrote:
> 
> > Can applications specify and receive the context values used? E.g.
> > to act as handles to refer to the resulting authority objects
> > (HTTP/2 absolutely needs to be able to refer to client authority).
> 
> The API might take one of two forms:
> 1. an application requests that authentication happen and get the
> identifier that TLS uses in return
> 2. an application requests authentication and specifies the identifier
> (the TLS stack will have to verify that this is unique and conforms to
> the restrictions)

In 2, I would imagine the context is probably usually a sequence
number of some kind.
 
> > Also, are all errors (including things like getting extensions
> > wrong or CA wrong) fatal to the whole connection, or how is error
> > reporting handled? One can't use alerts for non-fatal reports.
> 
> Good question.  Errors in encoding or otherwise problems following the
> rules in the spec should result in a connection-level fatal error.
> But if the certificate isn't trusted, handling that will be up to the
> application.

And that should presumably be communicated somehow...

> > Also, are applications expected to be able to specify exactly
> > where in stream to put an authentication (response)? Especially
> > so they can immediately follow with appdata coordinating the
> > usage.
> 
> Not sure where you are going here.

Being able for application to to wait for certificate/cv/finised
message to be sent, so it can do something special in application
layer immediately after that.



-Ilari