Re: [TLS] Deprecate SHA1 for signatures in TLS 1.3 (was Re: TLS 1.3 draft-07 sneak peek)

Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org> Tue, 14 July 2015 15:38 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
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 8CE2B1A1A31 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jul 2015 08:38:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 gbPd4fhe-gYl for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jul 2015 08:38:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mournblade.imrryr.org (mournblade.imrryr.org [38.117.134.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E0971A1A25 for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Jul 2015 08:38:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mournblade.imrryr.org (Postfix, from userid 1034) id 387B3284D74; Tue, 14 Jul 2015 15:38:51 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 15:38:51 +0000
From: Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane@dukhovni.org>
To: tls@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20150714153850.GU28047@mournblade.imrryr.org>
References: <CALuAYvbteowTeyWe9VneRHgyvzTRS3LfKdorWt=jmEy2k+wNqw@mail.gmail.com> <20150711204810.GU28047@mournblade.imrryr.org> <201507111709.27725.davemgarrett@gmail.com> <1649068.52kEfPtajD@pintsize.usersys.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1649068.52kEfPtajD@pintsize.usersys.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/a5WNQzmAi-Jfecnqb2q-yWMdOkQ>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Deprecate SHA1 for signatures in TLS 1.3 (was Re: TLS 1.3 draft-07 sneak peek)
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: tls@ietf.org
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: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 15:38:53 -0000

On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:31:26AM +0200, Hubert Kario wrote:

> > ========================================
> > All certificates provided by the server SHOULD be signed by a
> > hash/signature algorithm pair indicated by the client's
> > "signature_algorithms" extension (or the defaults assumed in
> > its absence), where possible. If the server cannot produce a
> > certificate chain that is signed only via the indicated supported
> > pairs, then it SHOULD continue the handshake by sending the
> > client a certificate chain of its choice that may include algorithms
> > that are not known to be supported by the client. If the client
> > cannot construct an acceptable chain using the provided certificates
> > and decides to abort the handshake, then it MUST send an
> > "unsupported_certificate" alert message and close the connection.
> > ========================================
> 
> What about the cert chain offered by client to server as a response to 
> Certificate Request message?
> 
> They are also under the limitation of using just the signature algorithms 
> advertised as supported by server.

Exactly the same strategy should apply when client certificates
are in use, send compatible if possible, else send something you
have.

-- 
	Viktor.