Re: [TLS] New Cached info draft

Stefan Santesson <> Wed, 31 March 2010 23:26 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBC753A68FA for <>; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:26:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.696
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.696 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.423, BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dpoXur6Xr3s1 for <>; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:26:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5DC83A68CC for <>; Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:26:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59E6B33F9EB for <>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 01:27:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (qmail 22060 invoked from network); 31 Mar 2010 23:26:58 -0000
Received: from (HELO []) ([]) (envelope-sender <>) by (qmail-ldap-1.03) with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP for <>; 31 Mar 2010 23:26:58 -0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 01:26:56 +0100
From: Stefan Santesson <>
To: Marsh Ray <>, <>
Message-ID: <>
Thread-Topic: [TLS] New Cached info draft
Thread-Index: AcrRKacNgiOPvdA6fkyqpKkZEHzxrg==
In-Reply-To: <>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [TLS] New Cached info draft
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
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: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 23:26:30 -0000

On 10-03-31 9:14 PM, "Marsh Ray" <> wrote:

>> While Marsh explanation sounded quite reasonable to me,
>> the implementors have a technical advantage of being more
>> accustomed to the TLS spec syntax for defining a vector size:
> It says:
>>    The length of
>>    an encoded vector must be an even multiple of the length of a single
>>    element (for example, a 17-byte vector of uint16 would be illegal).
> This requirement does not seem to allow a vector to be made up of
> variable-sized elements as in Stefan's suggestion.

I don't believe this is discussing the same thing.

This is discussing an encoded vector, which is different from the min-max
values of the vector.

As long as it is possible to encode the actual value of the vector within
the min-max values, you can encode the vector with appropriate length.


      opaque A<1..2^24-1>;

      struct {
          A b<0..2^24-1>;
      } C;

Is legal  <3byte b len><<3byte A len><A>..<3byte A len><A>>

(compare with definition of the Certificate handshake message having this
syntax structure)


      opaque A[16];

      struct {
          A b<23..24>;
      } C;

Would be impossible to encode b correctly since no multiple of A (16 bytes)
can be 23 or 24 bytes.

I don't see the buffer overflow issue. If the receiver receives a vector of
greater length than the max value, it should simply discard the data and
fail the handshake. I'm sure this exception case is defined somewhere.

The only issue I can see is whether the suggested max length is sufficient.
I.e. Is it realistic that a client will send more than 102 digest values of
cached objects.