Re: [TLS] Possible blocking of Encrypted SNI extension in China

David Fifield <> Thu, 13 August 2020 20:13 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88D143A0AC8 for <>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 13:13:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gzAguCgv2oqU for <>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 13:13:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2600:3c00:e000:128:de39:20ee:9704:752d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99DEB3A082F for <>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 13:13:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=mail; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References :Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding :Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=6JKPiPF22zEp7ymMn9j8Tn0zpjfRaCyRswSaGtZYmm4=; b=R2eaQ3Ci7G6sblasmg1/gM3Uph XLvuUJykaEwk6fTX27FRKCT6XucHbbdd+uF6z7sLpYETSB+O23bRp1D3apVs4KLV2BLVpyTA4RKew EZ7DtdeOm3bctk3YLOeTYZclHUFzV3fNBSFOs5dc3mUjLdpHX2HZ6qninUgmH4PiqQYg=;
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 14:13:06 -0600
From: David Fifield <>
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Possible blocking of Encrypted SNI extension in China
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 13 Aug 2020 20:13:13 -0000

On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 01:04:48PM -0700, Carrick Bartle wrote:
> Weird. Thanks for the update. How are you confirming that it's blocked from inside-out?

I couldn't test it myself, so I am relying on the reports of colleagues
in China. GFW Report is able to test directly from China.

Measurement vantage points in China are tricky to get ahold of. A
possible alternative is to use a reflected measurement system in the
style of Quack, which uses infrastructural echo servers:
Censored Planet does regular Quack measurements, but I don't think they
are testing ESNI yet: