IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] The case for a single stream of data

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Tue, 09 May 2017 16:00 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.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 B6AF512E76A for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 May 2017 09:00:47 -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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com
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 QOUtlpSL_pnW for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 May 2017 09:00:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB87B1270A3 for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 May 2017 09:00:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050095.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id v49Fq7G4025406; Tue, 9 May 2017 17:00:38 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=I2/T/zrQHxuu5mDIMJPvDCRQ544YFyQj2kVKMMTkRUE=; b=CaMMauCcC0ebmIB0DqTlsra5ZINjDxCIGScoGQdMetmgXhl06K0BkmZg1hIcesqbcFiH PRLN4gOngyiCDzdAp1mP6zlaKyYcQ9i/KZEJvsEQ+FZlEWOnjjLNRT8qC4+CC2eGzlR3 TtchRz2q2c07/1pjP0epkbA+BGs3SfYMCKpkL/eTU0Akx/t6s9Sxy1/GGapdIbp5C+zY ryrITGCraHTRLIaqxat3lCkBVJoyys3trs9HuXTzbggFeCtDDbwBmLBP/xaTz9Yt6mxR F5ZTISEq3oy0L7k2t0Pu3gA1eyGFh74UH1aAyIN1YE8UPVB2YCt6ZXZ6rcjOlsO7PtfK RA==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint4 ([96.6.114.87]) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2abatx2j48-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 09 May 2017 17:00:38 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint4.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint4.akamai.com (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v49FuGD3031297; Tue, 9 May 2017 12:00:36 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.30]) by prod-mail-ppoint4.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2a99tvyyhw-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 09 May 2017 12:00:36 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1263.5; Tue, 9 May 2017 12:00:35 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1263.000; Tue, 9 May 2017 12:00:35 -0400
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Colm MacCárthaigh <colm@allcosts.net>, "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [TLS] The case for a single stream of data
Thread-Index: AQHSxbylbnClX7eBZUm2Z/AGF1sif6HsLwTA
Date: Tue, 09 May 2017 16:00:34 +0000
Message-ID: <9f5858c8d86742b9aa82bdac46590c92@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
References: <CAAF6GDfm=voTt_=JrdGtiaYby1JG8ySU2s6myjjpHKeGvi0bMg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAF6GDfm=voTt_=JrdGtiaYby1JG8ySU2s6myjjpHKeGvi0bMg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.19.36.228]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9f5858c8d86742b9aa82bdac46590c92usma1exdag1mb1msgcorpak_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-05-09_13:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1703280000 definitions=main-1705090085
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-05-09_13:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1703280000 definitions=main-1705090085
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/KcifOCYXwkph8sm1lF2S7QfzAsM>
Subject: Re: [TLS] The case for a single stream of data
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 09 May 2017 16:00:48 -0000

To me, the argument against this comes down to this:  The 0RTT data has different security properties than the post-handshake data, and TLS implementations should not hide that difference from applications.

--
Senior Architect, Akamai Technologies
Member, OpenSSL Dev Team
IM: richsalz@jabber.at Twitter: RichSalz

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email