Return-Path: 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 8B9F6129556 for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 23:15:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 jAgPBwJAYS7d for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 23:15:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-yw0-x22a.google.com (mail-yw0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22a]) (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 6950D1294AE for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 23:15:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yw0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id t125so147593791ywc.1 for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 23:15:20 -0800 (PST) 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=Ys/bRxQQAHjsYcQ1GVvDgSvxj5MRxdS6PdDowbRghFM=; b=EFjHfHx5GK/bqdreO5GVwvL0SnEjPXRQA6uC02hPzLKgXtwLw4nJmNhrXLoJkJPQ9u nfKRB/PmdpxX0x7tuPJ0NoD8s0yE38BrepKfMxITCvgXrNJcu79NC612hA/M+AFqup+k 7yOk3shlRjvgidGfowSopIXYtFfigJS4rNUQ7MNxRKf6fHKAGe38on24G8luWv66Lzmq oayebV7fV5rGzCgDqgonaKpLwoDeZrTUoucBvwWdQfKt7bGegPFeLLSpY5Dv2Y7S/IX5 sRve03h/2elVDWAbpZd4kjouyY+NGmIj589bsQwnv4eL62Op1y+kYMc1azDpS5ASgmmI 5XaA== 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=Ys/bRxQQAHjsYcQ1GVvDgSvxj5MRxdS6PdDowbRghFM=; b=daeOxo5NwEhjBntGtkfKGIKaJXcx6EKF/4nnI+fDDffxSYxpwZXlENS6TG9kNHzsyD Ud2mpFABVCJWuym6MndiEUlwZF++A9WkYpP3cdrPuOrlCljqK+ktW+YaJvaN3Zxg1DAm S30+aJorD9VCWBsrzpIU1/YrkIaAxJMLMotaSeAvxJskfwQgaV/0BLE3n4WhLSddeJdN cFLq03NZMMVNpd8R5bTX5azwx6eyIm7UrOIdleEm2MjtDTt9eLdGlJ3LkO/2Azt2lkqU g8hwY/MA7/0iy76P0L4MFHXZlGRlne7FXjfl/BZO66XlNRCeWt/y8ZLSIQNzeSMgJE6X 5Ubw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvf1UNM0vUD63bnqNsJvazLXs9E9uOTIv+MepNWj8KMVI3zrn7Zqat8ndTpxAzCMBMXV4+wwYhN79RxzUA== X-Received: by 10.129.125.215 with SMTP id y206mr1410115ywc.234.1479366919761; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 23:15:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.129.159.141 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 23:14:39 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <8C67E8BB-B230-4C84-A890-C57614FF8A46@esat.kuleuven.be> References: <2d2ba626-0b5d-590f-efb7-e4ad30b5608b@esat.kuleuven.be> <201611081626.03635.davemgarrett@gmail.com> <8C67E8BB-B230-4C84-A890-C57614FF8A46@esat.kuleuven.be> From: Eric Rescorla Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 16:14:39 +0900 Message-ID: To: Roel Peeters Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11492dfabee41b054179f360 Archived-At: Cc: Jens Hermans , "tls@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [TLS] COSIC's look on TLS 1.3 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." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 07:15:23 -0000 --001a11492dfabee41b054179f360 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 This paragraph refers to the anti-downgrade mechanism described in 4.1.3. -Ekr On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 6:56 AM, Roel Peeters wrote: > Hi Dave, > > We are wondering because of this piece of text from the RFC EDITOR just > above paragraph 4.1.4 on Hello Retry Request: > > RFC EDITOR: PLEASE REMOVE THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH Implementations of draft > versions (see Section 4.2.1.1) of this specification SHOULD NOT implement > this mechanism on either client and server. A pre-RFC client connecting to > RFC servers, or vice versa, will appear to downgrade to TLS 1.2. With the > mechanism enabled, this will cause an interoperability failure. > Best, > Roel > > On 8 Nov 2016, at 22:26, Dave Garrett wrote: > > On Tuesday, November 08, 2016 09:55:36 am Roel Peeters wrote: > > we are also wondering whether or not the Hello Retry Request will be > included or omitted in the standard. Leaving it out will make TLS 1.3 > vulnerable again to downgrade attacks ... > > > Why are you wondering about this? HRR is in the specification and there > has been no discussion to remove it. > > > Dave > > > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls > > --001a11492dfabee41b054179f360 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This paragraph refers to the anti-downgrade mechanism desc= ribed in 4.1.3.

-Ekr


On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 6:56 AM, = Roel Peeters <roel.peeters@esat.kuleuven.be> wrote:

Hi Dave,

We are wondering because of this piece of text from the RFC= EDITOR just above paragraph 4.1.4 on Hello Retry Request:

RFC EDITOR: P= LEASE REMOVE THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH Implementations of draft versions (see= Section 4.2.1.1) of this specification SHOULD NOT implement this mechanism on either=20 client and server. A pre-RFC client connecting to RFC servers, or vice=20 versa, will appear to downgrade to TLS 1.2. With the mechanism enabled,=20 this will cause an interoperability failure.

Best,
Roel

On 8 Nov 2016,= at 22:26, Dave Garrett <davemgarrett@gmail.com> wrote:

O= n Tuesday, November 08, 2016 09:55:36 am Roel Peeters wrote:
we are also wondering whether or not the Hello Retry Request= will be
included or omitted in the standard. Leaving it out will make T= LS 1.3
vulnerable again to downgrade attacks ...

Why= are you wondering about this? HRR is in the specification and there has be= en no discussion to remove it.


Dave
=


___________________________________________= ____
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls


--001a11492dfabee41b054179f360--