IETF Logo Mail Archive

[TLS] Re: [lamps] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Re: Re: Re: TLS Client Certificates; a survey

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Wed, 01 April 2026 23:46 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: tls@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: tls@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B1DCD534A39; Wed, 1 Apr 2026 16:46:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1775087163; bh=ss/9bZQ/yqUJVDT2sKRIWFpp8Twfza7kzcQZ6r/vrrw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=uztsltrNKILxa42U0GWHypPb0RuvXZhuTMnlKWuKHIUPHo9mIJYSX5AUMafyC3ESS gEnBILhHbnBq9WrhPkzPvPx1QQAt1X1dJXYEXKIoXb1l3JvpEQyiWYX/j4tqs/f3iY g1TI2oE1mhJ/hmtkC7rWBBn/wGgj+thz7ehHraSc=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cryptonector.com
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KzxK4OFUlWwj; Wed, 1 Apr 2026 16:46:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from coral.yew.relay.mailchannels.net (coral.yew.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.220.39]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03133D5348FD; Wed, 1 Apr 2026 16:45:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A5157E2290; Wed, 01 Apr 2026 23:45:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a244.dreamhost.com (100-123-15-51.trex-nlb.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.123.15.51]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 188F87E2255; Wed, 01 Apr 2026 23:45:49 +0000 (UTC)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=mailchannels.net; s=arc-2022; cv=none; t=1775087149; b=V5JzqSxOgHayvL8TRoW5Mz0uOH8Pc31nVvR4E7oL1raGSMNOhquQoKSF4U50gR3jE4DiEj I4XkWRXb2/u2iw/Eo5hwvsdcSufyo+q17haZK3paZj479jYwVZGyX2GzmEtDVcqTJxJjP7 izmzdFqAIRFpoceokpUKTj6ILbEBRg/bQ6Cf+/lp380X7oX5Ch5qnsk8Zf4JAjmDFW+rH+ rlekKHJvWlt8h6zSQuzNA9k53PHzGh7ZArIdBtQQMUmfcLwW6JqWP+pAExp4OaQrIdRi3u 5BAACeynTqaq9VozFa62gwUwywZtZDao6cJzEyA4I5SaRsvs+alrglzR/4rYcg==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailchannels.net; s=arc-2022; t=1775087149; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=MSxY8QVatXV7AA2Mmq9IY9776KjrEeTXOFo1ggQRxtU=; b=g+SDOZJsAAlqNmQ57BP+KzNYWxmYyWkpKLkQGHAzcnwJ4ZGYqvXjYIQw80ckEM0B2x26yu nWO6tiuBSyyna09y3qBxQRmr5pkTlnlRmeldE0gmhRplbV3dd/iv91djC/t2a6d1vVzxoo XA1VgT5oNXOE26CA4QUGo+vzRTcfxLKcWR1oMm6MYCxLXi1uBJ84jekBWZ68Kt3Sbyo6Z+ OIpqhNN715Jwpc8Xzq0057PMnALhJTqfafwxEPf/SZ9UOraKhIzicb90vMHSE+L7hZAOQt WzaYPCJXZMup62wApPj9G71dAkfQ9j4R2zDNYDrCGjMXsMdjC+6Fp6qUALQLPA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; rspamd-7d86dcc447-2q59q; auth=pass smtp.auth=dreamhost smtp.mailfrom=nico@cryptonector.com
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
X-MC-Relay: Good
X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost
X-Decisive-Vacuous: 667f3cca406baed3_1775087149316_156331622
X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1775087149316:1833842482
X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1775087149316
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a244.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by 100.123.15.51 (trex/7.1.5); Wed, 01 Apr 2026 23:45:49 +0000
Received: from ubby (unknown [75.81.95.64]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a244.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4fmM7J3b94z107N; Wed, 1 Apr 2026 16:45:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; s=dreamhost; t=1775087148; bh=MSxY8QVatXV7AA2Mmq9IY9776KjrEeTXOFo1ggQRxtU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Content-Type; b=i656AXKXzAREr9YL83i2o+8R69X9t91MOOao6zWBWVf/rpFWgC7Pkd9c+vPk6wLtX saweUK8+89/3sTavkG5G5gVqrcCawuAdbxVtTdruDl5nVWTWPL9zI7EMHpSx1UhveN n4GJr0OatQ3nIyg9scOhYOpCZP4XQhZLWPsBcPEXetUAeA9uDIdMi0lF9aFm/1k2ly vwQULoJmWhDAN1muO8M28vb22k6tfuk+MpkJSPvfB+xw00mohST8VswCOuy1n4AVYx hahzJGlEPzxJ33/9VdlX78iQ+DJfY5HMTKts9rZmF8Uk1Hd6GWWC/na0TEl+VhodKo c5KSzdMvcd+eg==
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2026 18:45:46 -0500
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Andrei Popov <Andrei.Popov@microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <ac2uKnTtYVoqLHTX@ubby>
References: <MN2PR17MB40314193002D42E6ED4F465ACD4CA@MN2PR17MB4031.namprd17.prod.outlook.com> <MN2PR17MB40315028C6985BD9F4F0C886CD52A@MN2PR17MB4031.namprd17.prod.outlook.com> <acrfWoDSHUrYj1if@ubby> <CAKZgXHqKBwYqjB3SOexT1B3=P2m83esgQTV74PJtjk+LGwAhcA@mail.gmail.com> <CACf5n7-n6xj35ukPznkes8rDx9-QWi+CDntt2Z5jcM1L+uo1RQ@mail.gmail.com> <MEAPR01MB3654DAD44EEA7037763885D0EE50A@MEAPR01MB3654.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com> <LV0PR21MB66235C39FFCC9E350BC982DA8C50A@LV0PR21MB6623.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <ac15yB5aylmUnjc6@ubby> <LV0PR21MB66238385ED1FFD508AE4B02F8C50A@LV0PR21MB6623.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <ac2hvBKZUgEE78nS@ubby>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ac2hvBKZUgEE78nS@ubby>
Message-ID-Hash: ANLXUYFJEKBOHZ7E5XJKBIZAOL4NVTLB
X-Message-ID-Hash: ANLXUYFJEKBOHZ7E5XJKBIZAOL4NVTLB
X-MailFrom: nico@cryptonector.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tls.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: Tls <tls@ietf.org>, "spasm@ietf.org" <spasm@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [TLS] Re: [lamps] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Re: Re: Re: TLS Client Certificates; a survey
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/TKFI0fLU3Nm8GR0PopeaBulXEIY>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tls-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tls-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tls-leave@ietf.org>

On Wed, Apr 01, 2026 at 05:52:44PM -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2026 at 10:05:31PM +0000, Andrei Popov wrote:
> > Just to clarify: the net negative you're referring to is that an extra
> > certificate hierarchy (for client-only certs) needs to be configured
> > on certain deployed TLS clients?
> 
> No, that would be ok.  I'm talking about the disappearance of options
> for getting clientAuth dNSName SAN certificates.

But also I'd like to understand what the danger is with just clientAuth
dNSName SAN certificates that chain to WebPKI roots.  I expect the
danger of that for Web services is nill, so it's really the role-
symmetric type of services (MTA, XMPP) that most benefitted from being
able to get clientAuth dNSName SAN certificates that chain to WebPKI
roots.

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status