Re: [TLS] Consensus Call on MTI Algorithms

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Wed, 01 April 2015 18:53 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.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 C1EE31A8867 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 11:53:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 SHRTCc4YTU_s for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 11:53:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from odin.smetech.net (x-bolt-wan.smeinc.net [209.135.219.146]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B85781A86FA for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 11:53:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [209.135.209.5]) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35D8D9A401B for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:53:22 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smetech.net
Received: from odin.smetech.net ([209.135.209.4]) by localhost (ronin.smeinc.net [209.135.209.5]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UJEptQvycibD for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:53:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.100] (pool-96-255-133-185.washdc.fios.verizon.net [96.255.133.185]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EE479A4019 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:53:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-150-783088006"
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 14:52:50 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAOgPGoBk+E=cNV1ufBaQ0n7=CJQ34zukPixKCEdpmMLBX=Kg_w@mail.gmail.com>
To: IETF TLS <tls@ietf.org>
References: <CAOgPGoBk+E=cNV1ufBaQ0n7=CJQ34zukPixKCEdpmMLBX=Kg_w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-Id: <1C371A88-3F53-40F3-89F9-C04FC592DF3E@vigilsec.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/R8SPrpGya-naIg9kWqmRJVPYGSo>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Consensus Call on MTI Algorithms
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 01 Apr 2015 18:53:34 -0000

This seems fine to me for the roughly 128-bit strength.

Russ


On Apr 1, 2015, at 2:12 PM, Joseph Salowey wrote:

> o Symmetric:
>         MUST AES-GCM 128
>         SHOULD ChaCha20-Poly1305
> 
> o Hash:
>         MUST SHA-256
> 
> o Key Agreement: ECDH
>         MUST P-256
>         SHOULD 25519
> 
> o Signature:
>         MUST ECDSA P-256
>         MUST RSA