Re: [TLS] 0-RTT and Anti-Replay

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Mon, 23 March 2015 17:20 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.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 6972A1ACE62 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 10:20:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.666
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.666 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no
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 nyDfXM59E1Ok for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 10:20:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (sub4.mail.dreamhost.com [69.163.253.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CB5D1ACE61 for <tls@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 10:20:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4DD377805F; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 10:20:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=cryptonector.com; bh=BWuQ/MuOUTqWNh oJtM2MEfNgbGQ=; b=VNZ7tMKhi+f1DFu+16zgOUbUYvkurVAI57Cruojo8a+vOl Z8f87b6k51L548KspyT8z4y2kueJfxzA88axGwOO5kCdShqpVHP5iWj/0XTB8ys0 +aLCccJYSTrUEr6vO9n8ULm8Ay3fg7eeYnTwdkDjkZONOrbEJGncITuEugPyc=
Received: from localhost (108-207-244-174.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net [108.207.244.174]) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a36.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 55B0E77805B; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 10:20:57 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 12:19:55 -0500
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Message-ID: <20150323171955.GP21267@localhost>
References: <CABcZeBP9LaGhDVETsJeecnAtSPUj=Kv37rb_2esDi3YaGk9b4w@mail.gmail.com> <20150323084716.GM21267@localhost> <CABcZeBO88cvxXJULgpNCxC_Q4HhtOOVnpCoUWmo6=7GkVhFkdQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBO88cvxXJULgpNCxC_Q4HhtOOVnpCoUWmo6=7GkVhFkdQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/ZaU8e9SUH3I4XhiOW5UF1XVsR74>
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] 0-RTT and Anti-Replay
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: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 17:20:59 -0000

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 08:11:59AM -0500, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 3:47 AM, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>;
> wrote:
> > This is an optimization.
> >
> > If the server loses its replay state then it must cause every 0-RTT
> > connection to become a 1-RTT connection.  There's no question of "want".
> 
> Maybe I wasn't clear. When I said "reject" I meant "hard-fail" rather than
> make it 1-RTT.

Sorry it wasn't clear to me.  Is there any reason that fallback to 1-RTT
is not feasible?

For context, I'm proposing similar fallbacks (but for other reasons) for
Kerberos (which never had such a fallback).  This has proven desirable
in the context of Kerberos, and so I suspect it will be for TLS.

Obviously I'm missing some of the TLS 0-RTT context.

Nico
--