[TLS] Re: 2nd Working Group Last Call for The SSLKEYLOGFILE Formatfor TLS

[S Moonesamy <[e-mail]>]

Hi Thomas, Andrei,
At 06:43 AM 21-02-2025, Andrei Popov wrote:
>I agree with Stephen and Tomas on this one. Additionally, in  my 
>opinion, this WG should not have published any SSLKEYLOGFILE 
>documents, because they effectively standardize a backdoor.
>It is understood that there is a need for debugging, and it is 
>understood that certain SW vendors want to agree on a common log 
>data format and publish this format.
>
>However:
>- Debugging can (and should) be accomplished without a complete 
>compromise of the security protocol (arguably, with less ease/convenience).
>- Backdoor specifications can be agreed upon outside the IETF 
>process and published as part of the respective SW vendor's 
>documentation, without involving the IETF.

I agree with the comments which Thomas and you sent in regards to 
SSLKEYLOGFILE.  I also agree with the authors on the point that 
debugging or analyzing protocols can be challenging when TLS is 
used.  There was an extensive discussion about that during the 
discussion on the perpass and ietf mailing lists.  It ended with the 
publication of RFC 7258.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy