Re: [TLS] Data volume limits

Hanno Böck <hanno@hboeck.de> Tue, 15 December 2015 22:36 UTC

Return-Path: <hanno@hboeck.de>
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 A35051B2C2A for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 14:36:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MANGLED_BACK=2.3, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 OmQ9fjvNxXIW for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 14:36:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zucker.schokokeks.org (zucker.schokokeks.org [178.63.68.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6A961B2C23 for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 14:36:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pc1 (0x3ec67ae7.inet.dsl.telianet.dk [::ffff:62.198.122.231]) (AUTH: LOGIN hanno-default@schokokeks.org, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3, 128bits, ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256) by zucker.schokokeks.org with ESMTPSA; Tue, 15 Dec 2015 23:36:19 +0100 id 0000000000000044.00000000567095E4.0000037F
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 23:36:39 +0100
From: Hanno =?UTF-8?B?QsO2Y2s=?= <hanno@hboeck.de>
To: tls@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20151215233639.5a5e7558@pc1>
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBNR76DqPo0Mukf5L2G-WBSC+RCZKhVGqBZq=tJYfEHLUg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABcZeBNR76DqPo0Mukf5L2G-WBSC+RCZKhVGqBZq=tJYfEHLUg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.0 (GTK+ 2.24.29; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=_zucker.schokokeks.org-895-1450218980-0001-2"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/C-jcHl0wwuF11UoAlVw-sN-1U6c>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Data volume limits
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: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 22:36:24 -0000

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:14:30 -0800
Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:

> Watson kindly prepared some text that described the limits on what's
> safe for AES-GCM and restricting all algorithms with TLS 1.3 to that
> lower limit (2^{36} bytes), even though ChaCha doesn't have the same
> restriction.
> 
> I wanted to get people's opinions on whether that's actually what we
> want or whether we should (as is my instinct) allow people to use
> ChaCha for longer periods.

Let me state the opinion that unlikely will get adopted: Isn't that a
good reason to reconsider whether GCM is a good mode in the first place?

How about: Let's use chacha20, let's not set any limits because we don't
have to, let's deprecate algorithms that can't keep up with that?

(I generally think even TLS 1.3 deprecates a lot of stuff there is
still far too much variation. Let's keep things simpler, let's reduce
the algorithm zoo.)

-- 
Hanno Böck
http://hboeck.de/

mail/jabber: hanno@hboeck.de
GPG: BBB51E42