IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] Working Group Last Call for ECH

Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> Tue, 12 March 2024 01:25 UTC

Return-Path: <sayrer@gmail.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 336ADC14CE5F for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 18:25:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A6TrUTTBY3JH for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 18:25:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x12b.google.com (mail-lf1-x12b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12b]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C2F6C14F6ED for <tls@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 18:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-5133bd7eb47so5997204e87.3 for <tls@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 18:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1710206715; x=1710811515; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Ob5jcbZ7YP7T7TjZb5DHXxqUnCN4APbtOanN5L/63gw=; b=nUGL5uKg8g2YXRMXjm7b8IBVUYkSKD9LX1rwo4HuDsgazRbKqVz9z1f2ryCNlOeGNm PUMQdtXfjh3sK+sV1DNrwz3z36V4hp2P0kw2UCkLKgODnqz4VX4lTLolQJLynwUQ+HeU lqjUXVkb3R1QoiMNjX90KAKdzfqhl2YVi0Em6XHWG5xjP6HNztJq1Gyr1y8kSg52VcMO lrYafT8BtAEqHLq5ICCMpMq1eQ0/Xe+EANmnivJ6euwbUiXrorZ3wulCnF0pYmNtyH5I uCBwsKNeGleIGhiQJlxm9k/bYZFr3Tiq9uZOAUHVqUDNb+P9lEPuTNUAHwaClAycKd86 YW9Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1710206715; x=1710811515; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=Ob5jcbZ7YP7T7TjZb5DHXxqUnCN4APbtOanN5L/63gw=; b=WHCOnhY5xDnfBtV8gBpYQ9bHrDZocogML+sSF6b3CocVmE+F0pnoi9EFWjX1MBs8wB /9wFT7fkivBUIpDW94NINBcjYdAoTMzHamxZvoOzikdgkVBNkFJNlKb8gumcZJtL/Xvm HqiifKYJTJIavaUmZAjwEH7Iy1Fh5Snbvg61B8KGQ34T6mnBaMHuhJexAdr59a0kYCBB MU8LwfZ4qsfPss6YP3FIV0BOhLzxlcRFyCOOwZtzZKBXdWbtPR/h1LYkw+3A9QeWCVnI 4R3QKUo8JdWUitWFL6m1WH4mdpaYs/KRYVs2w7VscogoUdacAxJ1PzRrZwZa8muz0Cyu NkhA==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCX0k1jgJpJLSzEJBgJSBPI5SAbmB7p+tNRjMFvDrbh/WW+NTO1Iyw8AisUs6c8w9hGJgoAet/0TW2yRi8E=
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxtnE8MsxIzMN2jCsYQJKr4v+nbxZyEqxhidFqix2UdAZsYufmB W3p+i0WmMLLxolYZjnvh77MQua3tW97xwoAVBhGXh+wJ6Iwb/c7Wv6iVzCSGhbiWR2wAagQNgnB 7ARa55GiOx6LzBgH7ytIiB0yURTI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFDFIBg9Fkms2GCT+CVTa2f32eG4refHByelimWQYxr2dG4Abje8VYXRUZNbbkAn5UqKcmcscj5iPKPPxg7ZCY=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3a83:b0:513:b574:9421 with SMTP id q3-20020a0565123a8300b00513b5749421mr728149lfu.21.1710206714361; Mon, 11 Mar 2024 18:25:14 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAOgPGoD4iiJ7kivRo4xbe0peiMG3YdzUvmVHC2KvqnMOpm+N7Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAChr6SzdcXTuUpjifniwVZcE6yJ+eUMokXy--Y-YcyYqU5TotA@mail.gmail.com> <CAChr6SzepG0bihTdV9dXbaHF9fE4mHrfJfwA1qC_rFaK0ZHTqg@mail.gmail.com> <CAG2Zi20q2csHdRXpFGd323FmMP2_1QDX8O+6HyjmdJrNMKcRgg@mail.gmail.com> <CAChr6SxkZ3KQuWBCJvfQtkZ9ta2Xh5XmWpZWLNVfA-viHYsoHA@mail.gmail.com> <e5fdf97b-58b6-4cad-b398-e3598f1d468f@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <e5fdf97b-58b6-4cad-b398-e3598f1d468f@cs.tcd.ie>
From: Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 18:25:03 -0700
Message-ID: <CAChr6SyVXJcC5D-0-XryQv5fPvxbERJXk_bAypWOiOpcgnrTYA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: Christopher Patton <cpatton@cloudflare.com>, tls@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b3c40106136c87bb"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/IzdlpmG_59JxnHCO1yKu6vgkDZU>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Working Group Last Call for ECH
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 01:25:23 -0000

The one that got to me was:

"It SHOULD place the value of ECHConfig.contents.public_name in the
"server_name" extension. Clients that do not follow this step, or place a
different value in the "server_name" extension, risk breaking the retry
mechanism described in Section 6.1.6 or failing to interoperate with
servers that require this step to be done; see Section 7.1."

So, that seemed like it might be a problem for the previous analysis.

thanks,
Rob

On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 6:12 PM Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
wrote:

>
>
> On 12/03/2024 00:49, Rob Sayre wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 5:21 PM Christopher Patton <
> cpatton@cloudflare.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I don't believe there were any changes from draft 13 to 18 that would
> >> invalidate security analysis for draft 13:
> >>
> >>
> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-tls-esni-13&url2=draft-ietf-tls-esni-18&difftype=--html
> >>
> >
> > Hmm. It does look like there are few substantial changes in that diff
> that
> > might be worth re-checking, but I'm not trying to delay things with
> > nitpicking. If others feel the analysis of -13 is enough, then let's go.
>
> Not quite answering the question, but I don't recall any code
> changes affecting the crypto plumbing or interop since -13.
>
> Cheers,
> S.
>
> >
> > thanks,
> > Rob
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TLS mailing list
> > TLS@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email