IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] ECDH_anon

Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmav@redhat.com> Wed, 27 January 2016 08:13 UTC

Return-Path: <nmav@redhat.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 79C8D1B35A5 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:13:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_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 2MOaKS6Q4f9D for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:13:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 254411B359F for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:13:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C85F1C5F59; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:13:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from dhcp-10-40-2-235.brq.redhat.com (dhcp-10-40-2-235.brq.redhat.com [10.40.2.235]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u0R8DYjA000959 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 27 Jan 2016 03:13:35 -0500
Message-ID: <1453882414.26912.3.camel@redhat.com>
From: Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmav@redhat.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:13:34 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnXqH6MX=q+jKoOoDeWg3MGSvd0P3GNVTHPthq9OqwSMMg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABkgnnXqH6MX=q+jKoOoDeWg3MGSvd0P3GNVTHPthq9OqwSMMg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.27
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/OfC85fg_H_H-xybBE2Eo7PECW6k>
Subject: Re: [TLS] ECDH_anon
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, 27 Jan 2016 08:13:38 -0000

On Wed, 2016-01-27 at 14:51 +1100, Martin Thomson wrote:
> 4472bis has a TBD regarding a missing "E" in the name of ECDHE_anon
> cipher suites.
> 
> I raised an issue: https://github.com/tlswg/rfc4492bis/issues/17

My understanding of DH_anon and ECDH_anon is that they were made to be
used with static keys so even though anonymous one could verify that he
connected to the same server by checking the server's keys. I don't
believe anyone actually implemented that mode (I'm mostly speculating)
and most of the anon usage is with ephemeral keys, thus this proposal
makes sense.

However if the name is changed to underline the ephemeral part, it
would be nice to document the change of the intended purpose of these
ciphersuites.

regards,
Nikos

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email