[TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length
Eric Rescorla <ekr@networkresonance.com> Thu, 13 September 2007 18:38 UTC
Return-path: <tls-bounces@lists.ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVta9-0008Hg-T6; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:38:29 -0400
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVta8-0008GS-GU for tls@ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:38:28 -0400
Received: from [209.213.211.195] (helo=delta.rtfm.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IVta8-0008S7-73 for tls@ietf.org; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:38:28 -0400
Received: from delta.rtfm.com (localhost.rtfm.com [127.0.0.1]) by delta.rtfm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D32DD33C21 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Sep 2007 11:34:53 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 11:34:53 -0700
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@networkresonance.com>
To: tls@ietf.org
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) Emacs/21.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-Id: <20070913183453.D32DD33C21@delta.rtfm.com>
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de
Cc:
Subject: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length
X-BeenThere: tls@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/tls>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: tls-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Pasi asks: Currently Finished.verify_data is always 12 octets. With newer PRFs and hashes, more might be useful. Should this depend on the PRF? My take on this is that the 12-octet length is mostly independent of the PRF. After all, it's already been truncated from either MD5 or SHA-1. Is there a good security reason to change this? -Ekr _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
- [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Eric Rescorla
- Re: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Mike
- Re: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Eric Rescorla
- Re: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Mike
- Re: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Bodo Moeller
- RE: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Bodo Moeller
- Re: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Bodo Moeller
- RE: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Eric Rescorla
- Re: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Eric Rescorla
- RE: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Eric Rescorla
- RE: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Eric Rescorla
- RE: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [TLS] Issue 49: Finished.verify length Russ Housley