Re: [TLS] draft-ietf-tls-curve25519-01: Is public key validation necessary or helpful?

Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> Wed, 30 December 2015 10:51 UTC

Return-Path: <kurt@roeckx.be>
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 42DF21A3B9C for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 02:51:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 ykyVSRewQIbO for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 02:51:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from excelsior.roeckx.be (excelsior.roeckx.be [IPv6:2a01:70:ffff:1::3]) (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 5CEAE1A21C3 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 02:51:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from intrepid.roeckx.be (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by excelsior.roeckx.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D2D7A8A202E; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 10:51:38 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by intrepid.roeckx.be (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8C50A1FE01C0; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 11:52:07 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 11:52:07 +0100
From: Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>
To: Karthikeyan Bhargavan <karthik.bhargavan@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20151230105207.GB6140@roeckx.be>
References: <CAFewVt4Midtq7X6px4=A4hGkspQuJdzZQ907U=SJox0SdgfAJg@mail.gmail.com> <CACsn0cng1o-5hm=zuL6puOGJ8A2bjB=fFsaFsBCmmVofNSuumg@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnXQS3Ek6jDjx0aSQmaf+=EjfGWa8MG1AO4QwhJbK50VQg@mail.gmail.com> <CAFewVt4NSGDP_At8XsX4OsxSUaj_2kRyFP_keDQhfnR0=mBhrg@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUq0_28U6VqE=ZPpwutOBUkTGwhxqHQOEvQve5JYfSVRA@mail.gmail.com> <CAFewVt6fyqbOZfQkWY=9SM20WcrP0UhfH+3wvXjiYoTjPm2pgA@mail.gmail.com> <CAFewVt5U9awAg4FbdWtXiCATd-kWttdsAwe3eWwcD5SXsKvyWQ@mail.gmail.com> <6F6EDAA8-15F2-4949-B927-4D0BD0E8FFE3@inria.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6F6EDAA8-15F2-4949-B927-4D0BD0E8FFE3@inria.fr>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/BS_QM_fX0uX61h3H29cSRv6rFGM>
Cc: "<tls@ietf.org>" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] draft-ietf-tls-curve25519-01: Is public key validation necessary or helpful?
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: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 10:51:44 -0000

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 10:10:47PM +0200, Karthikeyan Bhargavan wrote:
> As mentioned before, validating Curve25519 public values is necessary in TLS 1.2 without session hash.
> Otherwise, as we pointed out in [1], the triple handshake attack returns.

Would it make sense to have session hash as a requirement in TLS
1.2 when you want to use Curve25519?


Kurt