Re: [TLS] Security concerns around co-locating TLS and non-secure on same port (WGLC: draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-08)

Michael D'Errico <mike-list@pobox.com> Tue, 09 November 2010 18:20 UTC

Return-Path: <mike-list@pobox.com>
X-Original-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A6EF3A6992 for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 10:20:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gIyIqOUmJa-a for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 10:20:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com [64.74.157.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63ACF28C114 for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 10:20:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 277292DD9; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 13:20:45 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=message-id :date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=qbgwu09mKvBA +iuL+q0DyhxeZ84=; b=u+/7VbXUbRpciWgdwHG7DRPbVz49Jx8H9LyjShiaB6bh w4AUoJu7xZ+z00tR0DXk7M8b9CMwcnarmC1pOvM0FA6hsVxfZSZx/iZECFbo5hUY djJvWrMhHU1e/aF1ckMVmma+GKESbqeVLb33vUlcA5tABjuy8HMrRuG+mKXeVF0=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=message-id:date :from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=U6BubY bGqL3wSG3AVEpnHx6ND/Rd4N6wRFLxbgJCQgljd07b6ttPWk5ublcZI2qxiljakJ 4UuUep9uXHQIRFh08sFI90Xs351nmu1gO3NgeqtOx8Ym+Byk69se4ydrYfUBqsXp I269TwEWV56URswMsXc2WG5r4FLe/E3qbCojo=
Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 160ED2DD8; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 13:20:44 -0500 (EST)
Received: from iMac.local (unknown [24.234.114.35]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7F7552DD7; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 13:20:42 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <4CD990F4.7010600@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 10:20:36 -0800
From: Michael D'Errico <mike-list@pobox.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Macintosh/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@oracle.com>
References: <4CD76B1B.5030308@ericsson.com> <4CD78027.6090004@pobox.com> <000501cb8001$a441f620$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <4CD97EA5.3000305@pobox.com> <20101109172643.GD6536@oracle.com>
In-Reply-To: <20101109172643.GD6536@oracle.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 10E5375E-EC2E-11DF-95E6-B53272ABC92C-38729857!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] Security concerns around co-locating TLS and non-secure on same port (WGLC: draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-08)
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
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." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 18:20:21 -0000

Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 09:02:29AM -0800, Michael D'Errico wrote:
>>
>>   - the most important requirement for protocols is integrity; I don't
>>     know how to achieve that without TLS.
> 
> There's the GSS-API...  There's IPsec...  The whole world isn't TLS...

I was talking about how I can communicate with, say, amazon.com from home.
GSS-API and IPsec are not options.  TLS is available pretty much everywhere.

Tom is right about constrained devices, but they are getting more and more
powerful every day.

Mike