Re: [TLS] TLS renegotiation issue

Nicolas Williams <> Fri, 06 November 2009 00:40 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67B133A6878 for <>; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 16:40:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.015
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.015 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.031, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BwuWpjKq38n1 for <>; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 16:40:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (brmea-mail-2.Sun.COM []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 386D83A67DB for <>; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 16:40:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ([]) by (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id nA60ewB5001828 for <>; Fri, 6 Nov 2009 00:40:58 GMT
Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (binky.Central.Sun.COM []) by (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL, v2.2) with ESMTP id nA60ewff031079 for <>; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 17:40:58 -0700 (MST)
Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (localhost []) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nA60TSYq009781; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:29:28 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id nA60TSZ3009780; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:29:28 -0600 (CST)
X-Authentication-Warning: binky.Central.Sun.COM: nw141292 set sender to using -f
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:29:28 -0600
From: Nicolas Williams <>
To: Eric Rescorla <>
Message-ID: <20091106002928.GS1105@Sun.COM>
References: <> <> <20091105230343.GO1105@Sun.COM>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20091105230343.GO1105@Sun.COM>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [TLS] TLS renegotiation issue
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2009 00:40:37 -0000

Note, there's a way to implement Eric's proposal as-is and in an
SSPI/GGF-GSS-API way that doesn't suck, but which does require a
layering violation, though one that I could live with:

 - client and server apps both extract the 'tls-unique-for-telnet'
   channel binding from the outer connection, prefix that with the
   RFC5056-required prefix, and pass that to the init/accept_sec_context

 - The TLS init/accept_sec_context implementation checks to see if the
   channel binding input starts with "tls-unique-for-telnet:" (the
   RFC5056-required prefix when using that channel binding type), and,
   if it does, then split the rest of the channel binding input
   accordingly and use the two halfs as per-Eric's proposal.

I can live with that.  I'd like to have a generic channel binding
facility in TLS.  I'd like to not have to implement such a layering