IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] Call for consensus to remove anonymous DH

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Wed, 16 September 2015 19:06 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 4246F1A006D for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 12:06:19 -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 PaxPy8M6iFjr for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 12:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-f179.google.com (mail-wi0-f179.google.com [209.85.212.179]) (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 8237A1A0056 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 12:06:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wicge5 with SMTP id ge5so88254374wic.0 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 12:06:16 -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=F6LV+xiMrBMklsYtJMqcveIdQr4MQl9o97WuWMsZk5U=; b=KHj+z3lYTA28f1uPKJevU00WkKK5ct9Nvf96ywzK2w3BPJ/rV3vmTVA+PRLG+65aU9 ndbkubjnejRs02f9AAbvcG1SHs0JeNz5zE9kWxFlbp6r3nVF1Adn0SBGYj6R+pazZ73a HUnge6J0qzqLJAWf3EbCsLXihmK1vYXfV5hXtpWEkpGMc+eN/jbsDQBJ6NgwE9nbzdf5 QyO0aGJUplvyeyIbHHVsisTfRuu/V4L0Kg+qTCrSJyGX/CgFzYdErSGHHvwXlmxtZv8Q cWaIauL+uzoHBCqIr2Fsc7jVhErYCWYE0ufs6DvX8A6oL7sVeHJeP/zfBCTJ/jCUkRGN Mp1w==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnt/HFOp8OIMr3RgXoWtUGkRPczO6sFZ2qZtDgPMnZysS/uNPyUbBkwiuL8vGWsKrc8XPc+
X-Received: by 10.180.188.33 with SMTP id fx1mr22008418wic.31.1442430376130; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 12:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.27.79.200 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 12:05:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BLUPR03MB1396384E6F55D614D6B631818C5B0@BLUPR03MB1396.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAOgPGoBT9C=pWebXShqxhbOsnqK+OZe=-n-SvZ_pH-dAtRaWXQ@mail.gmail.com> <BLUPR03MB1396384E6F55D614D6B631818C5B0@BLUPR03MB1396.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 12:05:36 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBOw2Rw_fXZUyGe_Dq7OWNnUfp-mdre3Op96t2OD8Fx1HQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrei Popov <Andrei.Popov@microsoft.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c269562ed5af051fe1fe1a"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/MroiMHHM9PUorMT7_y4lHd8Eoa0>
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Call for consensus to remove anonymous DH
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: <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: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 19:06:19 -0000

On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Andrei Popov <Andrei.Popov@microsoft.com>
wrote:

> To clarify, the proposal includes removing ECDH_anon, right?
>

Yes.



> If it does, I support it.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> Andrei
>
>
>
> *From:* TLS [mailto:tls-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Joseph Salowey
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 15, 2015 6:01 PM
> *To:* tls@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [TLS] Call for consensus to remove anonymous DH
>
>
>
> There has been some discussion to remove anonymous DH as described in
> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg17481.html.  I think
> ekr's message sums up the pros and cons well.  I don't think we have
> consensus on this issue yet.  Please respond on this message by Monday,
> September 21, if you have an opinion.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> J&S
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email