IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] PSS for TLS 1.3

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Mon, 23 March 2015 13:13 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.com>
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 A13721A8A01 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 06:13:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 3JFHjInHquWh for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 06:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com (mail-wi0-f174.google.com [209.85.212.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C91A41A8A0F for <tls@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 06:13:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wixw10 with SMTP id w10so62184701wix.0 for <tls@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 06:13:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=9UYXWP3qSz5zM6mNTF9JImALjbl+CasuAi/gmolreo4=; b=b74jRdirI5MVCybobKpP2k1eDgi7RIdet0SpAJnPdWn/As0Rhn9GLXQEqSXpK8i/4y SpPbwUl8+GO7Fpl17KaDUa6kClH0bjLr08mmPucAyWRXbhcVcUJxXeGlx6NjsaGBfai8 Yqb2x6+htv4TrZ/4NF3+MRx1+thquyrLf0R8Tet2G2Oat74yR66TaGGMF1cN+pdv179a 8dD5XFk+uLUMzhssNLKlU3kvef7A44BYHTkOrmitktqTzyHui2I4+iCLfu9kgNUQOfTB 8ynPi+rUwUAyYxcBKplhcyR0vDXR5af6LQdv3JQ5a67eC6K2wG3Y464TDeeihAeb+iP2 z82Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk+EUF7Y2n6zuO15OdCHhLGcGSrPLDU8YjZT4xV+eugAvyyFoBCSNpIYTqz6n3bSm6aPSs+
X-Received: by 10.180.84.99 with SMTP id x3mr938933wiy.35.1427116436554; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 06:13:56 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.27.205.198 with HTTP; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 06:13:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAK6vND8dpMpNFNgtAc8oO6LqQWyEgKQAXt3NtO4xWAZhf5c_1Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABcZeBOeoyggJfma8rvyeRrh6Dw+oSp5P-oUG0MR3ZprBOyUPQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAK6vND8dpMpNFNgtAc8oO6LqQWyEgKQAXt3NtO4xWAZhf5c_1Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 08:13:16 -0500
Message-ID: <CABcZeBN9+yaNRUu=7u=g2DA1Fpe9Yv5u6d39=5tMOjJ1Ct+MVg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Bowen <pzbowen@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f46d044403a84117e30511f47024"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/EC_T1O79Q5OzyZzdb_eMEJzP-io>
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] PSS for TLS 1.3
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: <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, 23 Mar 2015 13:13:59 -0000

On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Peter Bowen <pzbowen@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
> > During the interim we discussed discussion about adopting PSS for
> > RSA signatures in TLS 1.3.
> >
> > Clearly, we will not be able to just adopt PSS because certificates
> > will continue to be signed with PKCS#1 1.5.
>
> I would like to see TLS 1.3 allow certificates signed using PSS (RFC
> 4055 and 3447) and provide a way to signal the server that such
> certificates are supported.


I would think that in option #2, we would also require support for this.



> Currently there is no way to use PSS
> signed certificates with TLS at all, which is a problem.  I agree with
> the move to EC* as the preferred algorithm, but it seems like
> enhancing non-EC signatures makes sense for the same reason as fixing
> FFDHE.
>
> Possibly the SignatureAlgorithm extension could carry both (1) rsa and
> (tbd) rsa-pss?
>

This seems like the obvious design if we opt for the negotiation route.

Best,
-Ekr

Thanks,
> Peter
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email