Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_xxx_GCM_SHAxxx
Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 13 March 2014 19:25 UTC
Return-Path: <yaronf.ietf@gmail.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 B623E1A07D9 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 12:25:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 YyEGStzMgZdF for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 12:25:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x233.google.com (mail-wi0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38F291A0729 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 12:25:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f179.google.com with SMTP id f8so1634841wiw.12 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 12:25:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Oz1OvrAeF8doSkEf/weQOGuTK9hiYgUUYats4JOTLMA=; b=mHr+UJLtymK2a55/jb748XlDUzzKFje822tzP0+OGZQBVAN+F5kqqujGw4OFv9A1VK fUDLIjz6Bk/D9Mh88kZxOv5yYvJrhOVWmhTEP72PZXlyHswg5uwRy+Txd7xRFDgzCqc2 UymKHTbVY5OWFzpALCuKXUIh8HaI3obIgHnJgpgiBrs0o1pwqV8zpRg3U9N6bHavf1vC xJcCoNntJ4WY5NzYPRcVR6mXKUk2RWXl8QvB9IBsr4nqkI96w+3morSne225c/HyMSMj cB8wUWfTicmIohG2d+flQMxZgP7cjfxA5XjgNCt1B8+u793gablgKe559yvpB9nofJbM 5deg==
X-Received: by 10.180.189.169 with SMTP id gj9mr2989230wic.17.1394738730054; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 12:25:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.4] ([109.64.6.27]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ju6sm7944069wjc.1.2014.03.13.12.25.29 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 13 Mar 2014 12:25:29 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <53220628.8020302@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 21:25:28 +0200
From: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
References: <CAK3OfOgw70LVQsykxNZSH9+4Dn2inBTx0q0KrvujS1LOY1i9tg@mail.gmail.com> <532024EF.4060607@polarssl.org> <CAK3OfOiyVqett-bQ4Eta3MLFQSVkR_z2qPRow7C2bNxCoSNxbQ@mail.gmail.com> <5321FAB1.2070309@gmail.com> <CAK3OfOjfTyjg2jUP6ur3r6heaq0AiYTvNRnrW_2NbHNYSB+ezg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAK3OfOjfTyjg2jUP6ur3r6heaq0AiYTvNRnrW_2NbHNYSB+ezg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/EhN4HVGOYwpelUOyQTjpmEoQjGM
Cc: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <mpg@polarssl.org>, "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_xxx_GCM_SHAxxx
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: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 19:25:39 -0000
I fully agree. I was just saying that deploying them in real-life scenarios would require a more complete solution. Yaron On 03/13/2014 09:08 PM, Nico Williams wrote: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: >> this is about much more than anon-DH cipher suites. [...] > > Other anon ciphersuites exist. We should register these missing ones. > What rationale is there for not doing so? > > As to how to use them, that's a general and _orthogonal_ issue. > > Nico > -- >
- [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_xxx_G… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Daniel Kahn Gillmor
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Alyssa Rowan
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Alexandre Anzala-Yamajako
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Yoav Nir
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Peter Gutmann
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Alyssa Rowan
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Yaron Sheffer
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Martin Rex
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Yaron Sheffer
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Kurt Roeckx
- Re: [TLS] Still missing: TLS_ECDH_anon_WITH_AES_x… Peter Gutmann