IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] some questions for your draft

Marsh Ray <marsh@extendedsubset.com> Mon, 30 November 2009 00:20 UTC

Return-Path: <marsh@extendedsubset.com>
X-Original-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F9DD3A6A05 for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Nov 2009 16:20:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.48
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.48 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.119, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IWQi1h7X2gph for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Nov 2009 16:20:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org (mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org [204.13.248.72]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB1403A6A04 for <TLS@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 Nov 2009 16:20:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xs01.extendedsubset.com ([69.164.193.58]) by mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from <marsh@extendedsubset.com>) id 1NEu0J-000ND1-Mo; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 00:20:35 +0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xs01.extendedsubset.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 761B3603C; Mon, 30 Nov 2009 00:20:34 +0000 (UTC)
X-Mail-Handler: MailHop Outbound by DynDNS
X-Originating-IP: 69.164.193.58
X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/mailhop/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information)
X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX18OvNSpTm7fj2oN8ZE/wOH6uzoszrhqJkE=
Message-ID: <4B130FC8.1050905@extendedsubset.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:20:24 -0600
From: Marsh Ray <marsh@extendedsubset.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bodo Moeller <bmoeller@acm.org>
References: <C7316509.25DEC%dispensa@phonefactor.com> <001101ca6d63$7bf73970$5b9a1b0a@china.huawei.com> <4B0C7C4E.8010600@extendedsubset.com> <003701ca6d6d$515ea360$5b9a1b0a@china.huawei.com> <4B0C897C.8010904@extendedsubset.com> <009a01ca6dab$a90765f0$5b9a1b0a@china.huawei.com> <4B0D5EF3.3020905@extendedsubset.com> <20091125165522.A2CDA6C3173@kilo.networkresonance.com> <808FD6E27AD4884E94820BC333B2DB774F310FE976@NOK-EUMSG-01.mgdnok.nokia.com> <79D75A57-260E-4ECC-90FF-9EB3B9B99F66@acm.org>
In-Reply-To: <79D75A57-260E-4ECC-90FF-9EB3B9B99F66@acm.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
OpenPGP: id=1E36DBF2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: TLS@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] some questions for your draft
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
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/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 30 Nov 2009 00:20:43 -0000

Bodo Moeller wrote:
> On Nov 25, 2009, at 9:02 PM, <Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com>
> <Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com> wrote:
> 
>> While the RI extension fixes the man-in-the-middle problem, it doesn't
>> remove the problems when there is no man-in-the-middle, just the two
>> endpoints (either of whom could be potentially malicious).
> 
> Why do you think so?
> 
> If an RI-secured renegotiation shows a new certificate, this confirms
> that the same party is using those two certificates.  How could an
> additional (potentially malicious) party join the conversation?

I've been wondering that, too. What exactly is this defending against?

What is a (properly-authenticated) "malicious endpoint", and how could a
wire protocol defend against one?

- Marsh

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email