Re: [TLS] PSS and 1.2

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Sun, 24 July 2016 09:56 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E21712D62C for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Jul 2016 02:56:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 IjaqEyfltF0P for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Jul 2016 02:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yw0-x230.google.com (mail-yw0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::230]) (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 C083B12D5BF for <tls@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Jul 2016 02:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yw0-x230.google.com with SMTP id z8so116535448ywa.1 for <tls@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Jul 2016 02:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=oSxhqjvEY9zrETW2CVtML6mABB4wxN68DqxG2VMjsDk=; b=Jfk1Hy53RIs51jrnsItpEPIRltgubCUt8aPAeYPFYh1IUaZcnj9f7XKjzB4ZBZ7/Dk 4H35pbCYM5ywFu6alNyWjAmZdLGeoh3/nimjVGKxl77T3eMj+NVLJyFcCYYZEPsWtUWg yof1VekZe+cbOpI/88wHqurCnrTPKQ5nfrU+PTTeu10TrngGDBDKVqlUCXcvrsbOWZ/U +a/WvHRhoeI6FvBYw9NEh70aNVC/DHTz2FAd1bYIveBRbl6BTi+sNoVqqeXgCUdm/ETV 1Ace42KteJq8gvaRDKaqakCFXnDzKsDeW6cd43sHM4/yav13MdydEwKgep5o8bgA1p+T mLJQ==
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:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=oSxhqjvEY9zrETW2CVtML6mABB4wxN68DqxG2VMjsDk=; b=esM8sPiw/42r+FFXoY3cI74UBbZS7VtvQtBLpmScEDYjjF64AZZl5ft30c0ogGuM3D gyZTMCIBJ+rX2A6ECKup+JWso/gsplcqZTxRHIMsrVB4oO19RuMgxs7EjccJTQqwzMaY j27jsKNhnYG3u27RWtjZ6ozD1kZVzRoqxPJxX1yhPUVbSIlQNz1JcBpYwmPowqje6mEH +j0+aNvGZdwPKFHmo/TgUjokHuwePgD3s0c925wDq5hQ33FypInBlRG8Yh+E8VimcsFO cKgb8hx4OSKG2fA+CqRaqCHOPcnBCuLZIULDUV2ARu4UKuz1i1EGpAcWr6QdaKls1t73 Bt3Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouthLFyvRh1c/ntvzzgIjLPp/S8Qyv0vG9Q+Ako5WWsp0oOM+iW05ABw2Ow58DGvOFzwcyDhCuMDBuU4kw==
X-Received: by 10.13.244.197 with SMTP id d188mr10963430ywf.276.1469354213014; Sun, 24 Jul 2016 02:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.129.152.13 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Jul 2016 02:56:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnXXuxj07aXn+Z6mbHT6XRrzCOZxvUQTTPnRTmmtgMLU=A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABkgnnXXuxj07aXn+Z6mbHT6XRrzCOZxvUQTTPnRTmmtgMLU=A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 11:56:13 +0200
Message-ID: <CABcZeBPd0iJx2xOhPpreeBzX13s03oL3WHUtRORY3BBHvnjw4A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c086548eaaa8e05385eaf60
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/c9mBa3Gese-VVvCuRfL4cAmR_h8>
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] PSS and 1.2
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 09:56:55 -0000

I am in favor of this change. We should be trying to move to PSS in general
and there's no reason why 1.3 clients which support PSS can't also support
it for 1.2

-Ekr


On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
wrote:

> David Benjamin noted that we really need to decide whether PSS was
> something that we should have supported in TLS 1.2.  We can't have a
> situation where there are two implementations of 1.3 that for some
> reason have 1.3 disabled where they disagree whether PSS is
> acceptable.
>
> I have opened a PR that makes it clear that PSS is defined for TLS 1.2.
>
> https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/557
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>