IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] The risk of misconfiguration

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Thu, 08 May 2014 01:06 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.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 0378C1A0453 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 May 2014 18:06:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] 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 m5LGCw8GTpoS for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 May 2014 18:06:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com [96.6.114.98]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8F3F1A044C for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 May 2014 18:06:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 155071655C3; Thu, 8 May 2014 01:06:53 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com (unknown [172.27.22.71]) by prod-mail-xrelay06.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AAE91655BB; Thu, 8 May 2014 01:06:53 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from usma1ex-cashub.kendall.corp.akamai.com (usma1ex-cashub6.kendall.corp.akamai.com [172.27.105.22]) by prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6C489804E; Thu, 8 May 2014 01:06:52 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([169.254.1.79]) by USMA1EX-CASHUB6.kendall.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.105.22]) with mapi; Wed, 7 May 2014 21:06:52 -0400
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>, "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 21:06:51 -0400
Thread-Topic: [TLS] The risk of misconfiguration
Thread-Index: Ac9qWNuEtPeEkL+YT6WRf2bfutTgTAAANftg
Message-ID: <2A0EFB9C05D0164E98F19BB0AF3708C7130A13E47E@USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
References: <2A0EFB9C05D0164E98F19BB0AF3708C7130A13E3A2@USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com> <536A8804.8000207@akr.io> <CAK3OfOgVAg8MLSmRVLe-6vVVzX361xYo4uma3-GQQmn=qoWWbQ@mail.gmail.com> <CACsn0ckrnbQbz-KCEY6u-WU7ULPTQv46g3noz44jMjW5HmFU0g@mail.gmail.com> <CAK3OfOiSKkeknHMwS-a90rR4hF9J9HaNn_XL_b75Mrx3o_wVMQ@mail.gmail.com> <CACsn0cksBt3Mj587cG-U5O5=Kc2p5T1NCP_-LrMRBv1V2hR2wQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAK3OfOibPMSriPsgO286PEZ=N+sdnuDpPyJ_xDr9KdATA_QjLQ@mail.gmail.com> <CACsn0cmB3TQVzsCthYCuY1q-z10wPbmat32Ys9ABT361fYNZLQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAK3OfOgan_JvsuwGNgpzk4tUfoo+JhxbNaHkbZCtAs7DHufr-w@mail.gmail.com> <CACsn0cmeq66S8LS38FmooWpOf534Gda5t09Ro1F3anLb-fJMMQ@mail.gmail.com> <20140508001532.GG27883@mournblade.imrryr.org> <CACsn0ck4mq3LnUwmBwBTgtuA+tHW9_FLHi1zdkz-ApkmtZs7eg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACsn0ck4mq3LnUwmBwBTgtuA+tHW9_FLHi1zdkz-ApkmtZs7eg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/bdh62KBY0AABmQvi4eE4UOd0z3c
Subject: Re: [TLS] The risk of misconfiguration
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, 08 May 2014 01:06:59 -0000

>> The solution to avoid accidental use of NULL ciphers is in the client 
>> API, no client HELLO should ever include a mixture of NULL and 
>> non-NULL ciphers-suites.

> Why not make that a MUST in the RFC, and the same for anonymous DH?
> I think this solves most of the configuration issues without making any uses impossible.

I think this is worth serious consideration.

	/r$

--  
Principal Security Engineer
Akamai Technologies, Cambridge, MA
IM: rsalz@jabber.me; Twitter: RichSalz

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email