IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 draft-07 sneak peek

Dave Garrett <davemgarrett@gmail.com> Fri, 03 July 2015 19:16 UTC

Return-Path: <davemgarrett@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 EE5041A6EFC for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Jul 2015 12:16:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 DJpP_To6OYuY for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Jul 2015 12:16:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yk0-x232.google.com (mail-yk0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::232]) (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 B18E71A6EF2 for <tls@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Jul 2015 12:16:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ykfy125 with SMTP id y125so102682953ykf.1 for <tls@ietf.org>; Fri, 03 Jul 2015 12:16:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=pl8qIJDvzpBZ8lx4pkp3Wneep+/81euLMzu9ItJUOXY=; b=WlzYdwQ+dxFuX1JPiNuMNQ6it16wsjl87msD4OaOqLkH/XqW3jfTMTY/+F/8TzVffd nJwIvhjdqNTIOSeYUTg5IdjSbj3luesQdxCOtLvCNQJVZqVfWPHQEj1o8lTCFuz3/Mh0 Yd5B26r1Qd7575J61FaVAn66pTAwY6nRQ4nCldoYKXlnwpvK7D8RSvYQFOB6wQHsXFHt yioXjZp9d+9HVOqPt7Ocl2dNTviNMlHUGOwT+r2ChOmzK/KecwqEn49Ug+JfsSzCoDhp Ci1TFe88aeqSmUz61XfcACa4GQvwdnngBebPjpZ1Rjv+7vKqoPruBHRiLFnizIchml9S Cczw==
X-Received: by 10.170.121.210 with SMTP id n201mr45639934ykb.97.1435950972054; Fri, 03 Jul 2015 12:16:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dave-laptop.localnet (pool-96-245-254-195.phlapa.fios.verizon.net. [96.245.254.195]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id w139sm9910316ywa.56.2015.07.03.12.16.11 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 03 Jul 2015 12:16:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dave Garrett <davemgarrett@gmail.com>
To: Hubert Kario <hkario@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2015 15:16:10 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.32-74-generic-pae; KDE/4.4.5; i686; ; )
References: <CABcZeBOWK_WnHAefsZUBr4UyEkyiZqi1mhoZH8ZeGFftdOqTTw@mail.gmail.com> <201507031334.45268.davemgarrett@gmail.com> <1464952.uPJxibJBm7@pintsize.usersys.redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <1464952.uPJxibJBm7@pintsize.usersys.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201507031516.10530.davemgarrett@gmail.com>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/BGNeWWnGed-vA26-ztJx0p7_dv8>
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] TLS 1.3 draft-07 sneak peek
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: <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: Fri, 03 Jul 2015 19:16:14 -0000

On Friday, July 03, 2015 01:43:08 pm Hubert Kario wrote:
> On Friday 03 July 2015 13:34:44 Dave Garrett wrote:
> > On Friday, July 03, 2015 01:23:19 pm Hubert Kario wrote:
> > > I've noticed that the default values in case the client didn't use
> > > signature algorithms extensions is to use SHA1+RSA, SHA1+DSA and
> > > SHA1+ECDSA.
> > > 
> > > As we all know, those are not considered secure now.
> > > 
> > > Maybe we should update it to SHA256 for all three?
> > 
> > No point; usage of the extension is probably going to be mandatory. If so,
> > we can just remove the defaults bit.
> 
> It will be better to have it updated and then removed than not updated, 
> forgotten and published, don't you think?

Sure, that's fine too.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email