Re: [TLS] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-tls-pwd

"Dan Harkins" <dharkins@lounge.org> Thu, 05 December 2013 21:13 UTC

Return-Path: <dharkins@lounge.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 46FCA1AE106 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:13:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.867
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.867 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_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 DZdhwOJCF3mC for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:13:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from colo.trepanning.net (colo.trepanning.net [69.55.226.174]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D4551AE0E2 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:13:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from www.trepanning.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by colo.trepanning.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A66E41022404E; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:13:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 69.12.173.8 (SquirrelMail authenticated user dharkins@lounge.org) by www.trepanning.net with HTTP; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:13:05 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <37a363d2bab1945c4d0bd71b6d9d14ae.squirrel@www.trepanning.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ8ZG3HwTe0gvrrieYAVZZSd=xfU9GWYo1YHMHWmD9c+EsxbQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3065D910-832C-47B6-9E0B-2F8DCD2657D2@cisco.com> <529C990D.3020608@gmail.com> <CACsn0cmtP_dF7N2op4DZUwR8t-fW30GmtdqQoteZ+9Y0oH3dUg@mail.gmail.com> <a4b1729af4966e99df1582943f02a0a8.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <CACsn0cksrU2GErd6FkZPkXKXK4pSJhTbBoJ-0C-14jsM=UY2iQ@mail.gmail.com> <14e67efee74d2ec6d535f6750ed829db.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <CACsn0c=PnB2CA8rpNtcOp6RRLNWHEPN-aN+AdWSF7FJM2wZOog@mail.gmail.com> <6d86c3be1741ed14992ec8662e0d32c7.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <CADMpkcKTAARYK2id27T44eVyx6gF24mkt9nAkUZbSmwtEtd2gg@mail.gmail.com> <6c129fd89a9e5953ba844e4e1d1e6e98.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <CAGZ8ZG0n7AFWc_WpxLzKbhnRxz8hkQAD-j8VDtX_GOHD5Nc6nw@mail.gmail.com> <7c8448fa356f5d764186ca62552efb1d.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <CAGZ8ZG3HwTe0gvrrieYAVZZSd=xfU9GWYo1YHMHWmD9c+EsxbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:13:05 -0800 (PST)
From: "Dan Harkins" <dharkins@lounge.org>
To: "Trevor Perrin" <trevp@trevp.net>
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.14 [SVN]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-tls-pwd
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: Thu, 05 Dec 2013 21:13:14 -0000

On Thu, December 5, 2013 12:42 pm, Trevor Perrin wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Dan Harkins <dharkins@lounge.org> wrote:
>>> See the discussion around SRP that occurred when you first presented
>>> this.  Any patent FUD which *might* have existed, once, has expired:
>>>
>>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg08203.html
>>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg08191.html
>>
>>   Yes I am aware that the original EKE patent expired. But EKE cannot be
>> used with elliptic curves.
>
> Not true, for example see Hamburg and Bernstein's Elligator 2 [1],
> which could be used as the basis for a DH-EKE style PAKE.

  Now THAT is an interesting alternative.

  But, alas, the benefit of doing that is uncompelling to you so I don't
know why you mention it. According to you the cryptographic difference
provided by EKE using Elligator public keys has nothing to do with the
architectural differences that you insist are behind the disinterest
(according to you) of PAKE protocols in TLS.

> We should not standardize protocols which are inferior to existing
> ones and to newer alternatives, have insufficient cryptographic
> analysis, have no application, and have no support in the WG beside
> the draft authors and the NSA [2].

  That is just pathetic FUD and a really lame smear. You should be
ashamed of yourself.

> I remain opposed.

  And you even would be opposed to alternatives you suggest instead
(see above). You helped out on TLS-SRP and are opposed to anyone
doing anything else. That is quite obvious.

  Dan.

>
> Trevor
>
> [1] https://eprint.iacr.org/2013/325.pdf
> [2] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg08371.html
>