Re: [TLS] What would make TLS cryptographically better for TLS 1.3

mrex@sap.com (Martin Rex) Tue, 05 November 2013 00:37 UTC

Return-Path: <mrex@sap.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 6671321E839C for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 16:37:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.103
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.103 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.146, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XeNIowMtBPEq for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 16:37:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpde01.sap-ag.de (smtpde01.sap-ag.de [155.56.68.170]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36CE721E839F for <tls@ietf.org>; Mon, 4 Nov 2013 16:36:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail06.wdf.sap.corp by smtpde01.sap-ag.de (26) with ESMTP id rA50aqw1018075 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 5 Nov 2013 01:36:52 +0100 (MET)
In-Reply-To: <CA+BZK2pZ=AFs5qw8dTbiV+s0KdSeFJH1-Z+UbaJZnQwHNgdXuA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ralf Skyper Kaiser <skyper@thc.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2013 01:36:52 +0100 (CET)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL125 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-Id: <20131105003652.5B7AF1AA54@ld9781.wdf.sap.corp>
From: mrex@sap.com (Martin Rex)
X-SAP: out
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] What would make TLS cryptographically better for TLS 1.3
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: mrex@sap.com
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: <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: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 00:37:07 -0000

Ralf Skyper Kaiser wrote:
> 
> (An example are jabber servers using TLS. Most clients allow the user to
> accept any server certificate without verification. The jabber server has
> no way to detect which client performed proper certificate verification and
> CN<>URI match).

Huh?

What policy the client applies when checking the server's certificate
chain is none of the server's business.  This is entirely at the
discretion of the client.

-Martin