Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA BCP
"Blumenthal, Uri - 0668 - MITLL" <uri@ll.mit.edu> Wed, 03 September 2014 18:50 UTC
Return-Path: <prvs=4323ef581d=uri@ll.mit.edu>
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 953BB1A06EE for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Sep 2014 11:50:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.867
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.867 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=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 bUfnWoMxnYwS for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Sep 2014 11:50:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx2.ll.mit.edu (MX2.LL.MIT.EDU [129.55.12.46]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F0E91A04B9 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Sep 2014 11:50:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from LLE2K10-HUB02.mitll.ad.local (LLE2K10-HUB02.mitll.ad.local) by mx2.ll.mit.edu (unknown) with ESMTP id s83Io3R1022762; Wed, 3 Sep 2014 14:50:23 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_943A533C-5F4D-4829-BE6A-D334C397AD0D"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: "Blumenthal, Uri - 0668 - MITLL" <uri@ll.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <5407574B.5060708@net.in.tum.de>
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 14:46:51 -0400
Message-ID: <9120B6EE-F023-4724-9116-A169993F58E8@ll.mit.edu>
References: <54048985.1020005@net.in.tum.de> <CAMeZVwtQ09B6Ero2C=75m5JdAYnEAENNcESd_gg_Ro2UhA9dyA@mail.gmail.com> <3EB754B7-F6B2-4207-A2F0-E61F32EE1E40@ll.mit.edu> <54075016.6040406@net.in.tum.de> <20140903174958.GF14392@mournblade.imrryr.org> <5407574B.5060708@net.in.tum.de>
To: Ralph Holz <holz@net.in.tum.de>, "<tls@ietf.org>" <tls@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.12.52, 1.0.27, 0.0.0000 definitions=2014-09-03_08:2014-09-03,2014-09-03,1970-01-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1402240000 definitions=main-1409030197
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/iOVyjnq6KrDaSRzJu6VWiPFdXjE
Subject: Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA BCP
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: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 18:50:48 -0000
On Sep 3, 2014, at 14:00 , Ralph Holz <holz@net.in.tum.de> wrote: >>> That will make it clear that implementers are free to retain NULL (and >>> they will), but that the purpose of the BCP is to propose secure TLS >>> configurations to protect application-layer protocols, and for those no >>> deployment should ever negotiate NULL. >> >> This is still too strong. Local MTA to Mail-Store LMTP is an >> application protocol. It is a fine use-case for NULL ciphers. > > I hear you (and the others), but balancing the purpose of the BCP with > such requirements as you mention leads me to believe we should favour > the solution I proposed. I added one more thing, though: > > "Note: TLS implementations MAY retain code for the NULL cipher to allow > specialised purposes like debugging, custom solutions, etc.” Guys, Per RFC2119, certain words have certain meanings. :-) In particular, “MUST NOT” means not that “don’t do that unless you can claim an exception”. It means “don’t do that as it is absolutely prohibited by this spec, no exception”. What you probably want to specify here is “SHOULD NOT”. Before replying - please check with RFC 2119. It’s three pages long, so wouldn’t take much of your time. (P.S. I wish people got really familiar with the standard terminology before trying to write/edit a standard.)
- [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA BCP Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Blumenthal, Uri - 0558 - MITLL
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Salz, Rich
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Blumenthal, Uri - 0558 - MITLL
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Paul Lambert
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Bodo Moeller
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Blumenthal, Uri - 0558 - MITLL
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Yutaka OIWA
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Blumenthal, Uri - 0558 - MITLL
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Blumenthal, Uri - 0668 - MITLL
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Geoffrey Keating
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Blumenthal, Uri - 0668 - MITLL
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Blumenthal, Uri - 0668 - MITLL
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Blumenthal, Uri - 0558 - MITLL
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Yutaka OIWA
- [TLS] uta-tls-bcp-02 thoughts (was: NULL cipher t… Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Bodo Moeller
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Yutaka OIWA
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Blumenthal, Uri - 0558 - MITLL
- Re: [TLS] uta-tls-bcp-02 thoughts (was: NULL ciph… Blumenthal, Uri - 0558 - MITLL
- Re: [TLS] uta-tls-bcp-02 thoughts (was: NULL ciph… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] uta-tls-bcp-02 thoughts (was: NULL ciph… Blumenthal, Uri - 0558 - MITLL
- Re: [TLS] uta-tls-bcp-02 thoughts Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] uta-tls-bcp-02 thoughts Blumenthal, Uri - 0558 - MITLL
- Re: [TLS] uta-tls-bcp-02 thoughts Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] uta-tls-bcp-02 thoughts (was: NULL ciph… Barry Leiba
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Bill Frantz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Daniel Kahn Gillmor
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Bodo Moeller
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Ilari Liusvaara
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Blumenthal, Uri - 0668 - MITLL
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Ralph Holz
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Bodo Moeller
- Re: [TLS] NULL cipher to become a MUST NOT in UTA… Viktor Dukhovni