Re: [TLS] 0-RTT encrypted data limits

Ilari Liusvaara <ilariliusvaara@welho.com> Thu, 01 September 2016 15:22 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 F355112DA42 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 08:22:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.448
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548] 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 T_7e_VTnGOuQ for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 08:22:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from welho-filter4.welho.com (welho-filter4.welho.com [83.102.41.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0075612DA08 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 08:22:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by welho-filter4.welho.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32D97140A3; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 18:22:05 +0300 (EEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at pp.htv.fi
Received: from welho-smtp2.welho.com ([IPv6:::ffff:83.102.41.85]) by localhost (welho-filter4.welho.com [::ffff:83.102.41.26]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4XTULxIKFwkm; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 18:22:03 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from LK-Perkele-V2 (87-100-237-87.bb.dnainternet.fi [87.100.237.87]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by welho-smtp2.welho.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DA41F21C; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 18:22:03 +0300 (EEST)
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 18:22:03 +0300
From: Ilari Liusvaara <ilariliusvaara@welho.com>
To: David Benjamin <davidben@chromium.org>
Message-ID: <20160901152203.hivko6qm2jdguqc6@LK-Perkele-V2.elisa-laajakaista.fi>
References: <6918283.boJRZ9WqjH@pintsize.usersys.redhat.com> <CABcZeBMOyM2v3gt69gHzfW7k5w=OwFqCUiER-bPERfNkLGhpWQ@mail.gmail.com> <6822534.tPWjKYA1SU@pintsize.usersys.redhat.com> <CABcZeBN_TPyYD63u4t41SKn-T6ugZdpxgM8i7-tJ82tU13+yUA@mail.gmail.com> <20160901131521.rjw3jebdjwwizp2z@LK-Perkele-V2.elisa-laajakaista.fi> <CABcZeBMUA8tzsPr_6pC6kRzhPifxuz4YjSRo1KB2V52SiGWstw@mail.gmail.com> <CAF8qwaCwqydWk30875=p1p2NkK+Ju+NtVL6meybYESN6GxCSJw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAF8qwaCwqydWk30875=p1p2NkK+Ju+NtVL6meybYESN6GxCSJw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/ (1.7.0)
Sender: ilariliusvaara@welho.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/Cb91BGAJNiR2-5nNLL9njzrCIBE>
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] 0-RTT encrypted data limits
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: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 15:22:14 -0000

On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 02:29:00PM +0000, David Benjamin wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 10:01 AM Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 6:15 AM, Ilari Liusvaara <ilariliusvaara@welho.com>
> >>
> >> Should there be recommendation for clients to cut transfer and send
> >> Finished if the client receives EncryptedExtensions without
> >> early_data extension?
> >>
> >
> > I thought that was implicit, but i'd take a PR that did that.
> >
> 
> (s/EncryptedExtensions/ServerHello/, but whatever.)

According to the table it is EncryptedExtensions (but there have been
errors in it before)...
 
> At this point the client must do much more than cut transfer anyway. It
> probably should be phrased as starting over and retrying or so. Everything
> sent has been rejected and all you thought you knew about the connection
> may have changed, like ALPN. At sufficiently high layers, you should
> probably just pretend you got a fresh connection and are repeating the
> request (or whatever) from scratch.

So server is supposed to continue on 0-RTT fail, but not client?


-Ilari