Re: [TLS] Accepting that other SNI name types will never work.

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Thu, 03 March 2016 23:16 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.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 570231B2F9C for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 15:16:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 M0ErPNbtTTIN for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 15:16:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ig0-x229.google.com (mail-ig0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 658271B2F55 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 15:16:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ig0-x229.google.com with SMTP id hb3so6695897igb.0 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 03 Mar 2016 15:16:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=IudQrjw5gW63nFyygIt8oUR6cQb3hCh+gIULTqEGJ8c=; b=DNpXDNs16RwHtHkdnRaTyU/7x+b8SVYgs0AI2iGhuToCi1XOt+9hr6lGhZ6c/V1XCq ekuk0twMKtOdZmttwqmEoVHkFihTLHv8TSaddI1dbvd9fi4Ch0xCo7LvHDqAUK4suQTV Uf5WrIaBl4DkGga3vgNMx9lM1B8fHlZgGd2Z2MP53BTKqUq55XE0G6yY+2qqcGn8jlI3 izvHUTtycBFeporXCBiFNnfVuu1NC1IMFdzSO2eqWgDEbuqcoIVl606TIymexhpWANhM gQoUwOhNnscLJe+QRqV4C9DoqK0rGhJLvmVx9dQ3aJahcvE0yZTg8h3ViR0i6+b1XICx U3dw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=IudQrjw5gW63nFyygIt8oUR6cQb3hCh+gIULTqEGJ8c=; b=Gwk2mvvxSoCk5JStwfb1RURxkomUhV6rPk0czFZKexPdNZyLwynTroRmGDwLV8/f2r pFIewNKh1Y6YFh25RsM4th5v14U4FmyJVMnz2wF/GLHOIRWAmCLM/n9ZaktnF3j0ZO5b wiKesI7kwICbq17pEP3CWe9wJYYl3j6m/PNt0X/GzicnfQ842Vh5x+CW9oeUrzIVr7/N p7++F12VGrIo1e2j1AxeSw2dpivnWBYn2KrtH3aalO487gFN9GJBXk3Zwx7iz6WQ/e1I B8RnVrP4p4pcmYfqOrHRrkNNpFsVBA5SOuNOndJOnpyUVQREoFeJ6V9ZAVIqOaCmjrcN PcGA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJvMnLXvDbjan4scBA5i+2yATFU/JyueUHFepSU5bwsQHUQLYgs2oZk0GzWalrP1ABK8J9oJN9EzDMgLQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.28.105 with SMTP id a9mr513221igh.94.1457046985724; Thu, 03 Mar 2016 15:16:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.36.43.5 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 15:16:25 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAMp7mVtwrF9CL-MqyF0UZJemBOMyFieAy++-_539fE5eAB_KMQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMfhd9WNHqfRH=M=_B7_apJ-r43fi8qoe-+VcDkrKPwwhkPR5A@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWd_4F-J5m8vtR2fNtKg+1sB=HVAr=w0CPT6W+31g_Kgg@mail.gmail.com> <CAMp7mVtwrF9CL-MqyF0UZJemBOMyFieAy++-_539fE5eAB_KMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 10:16:25 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWf_W--LQixDBfSqeinQ01Ew4c-QXuSnyE-qN5ckrfCsA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: Richard Moore <rich@kde.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/X_p-56a2U-YybG5KIHKLJMikbm0>
Cc: Adam Langley <agl@imperialviolet.org>, "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Accepting that other SNI name types will never work.
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 23:16:28 -0000

If we actually have a volunteer for sni-bis, then that would be OK with me.

However, I don't regard the errors as important.  Any hope that they
might be used in some automated fashion died a long time ago.  Mainly
due to this complete lack of consistency.  I assume that the last
error indicates that you didn't get an alert, which I find is
alarmingly common in TLS.

On 4 March 2016 at 09:52, Richard Moore <rich@kde.org> wrote:
> If you're fixing that then maybe standardising the errors makes sense too.
> My fingerprinter sees the following:
>
> For an empty name:
>
> SNIEmptyName: *(301)alert:DecodeError:fatal|
> SNIEmptyName: *(301)alert:HandshakeFailure:fatal|
> SNIEmptyName: *(301)alert:IllegalParameter:fatal|
> SNIEmptyName: *(303)alert:UnexpectedMesage:fatal|
> SNIEmptyName: error:Unexpected EOF receiving record header - server closed
> connection|
>
> For a long name (x repeated 500 times):
>
> SNILongName: *(301)alert:HandshakeFailure:fatal|
> SNILongName: *(301)alert:IllegalParameter:fatal|
> SNILongName: *(301)alert:UnrecognizedName:fatal|
> SNILongName: *(303)alert:UnexpectedMesage:fatal|
> SNILongName: error:Unexpected EOF receiving record header - server closed
> connection|
>
> Rich.
>
>
> On 3 March 2016 at 22:44, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 4 March 2016 at 05:49, Adam Langley <agl@imperialviolet.org> wrote:
>> > (I think the lesson here is that protocols should have a single joint,
>> > and that it should be kept well oiled. For TLS, that means that
>> > extensions should have minimal extensionality in themselves and that
>> > we should generally rely on the main extensions mechanism for these
>> > sorts of things.)
>>
>> Big +1
>>
>> Note that the NSS bug also entailed non-zero SNI name types
>> overwriting the actual SNI.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TLS mailing list
>> TLS@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>
>