Re: [TLS] TLS renegotiation issue

Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com> Thu, 05 November 2009 20:42 UTC

Return-Path: <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com>
X-Original-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75A7D3A68DB for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:42:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.016
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.016 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.030, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 277uUWZpLFnw for <tls@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:42:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com (brmea-mail-1.Sun.COM [192.18.98.31]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DD4C3A68C8 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:42:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dm-central-02.central.sun.com ([129.147.62.5]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id nA5KhBEm001453 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 20:43:11 GMT
Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (binky.Central.Sun.COM [129.153.128.104]) by dm-central-02.central.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL, v2.2) with ESMTP id nA5KhASD021652 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 13:43:10 -0700 (MST)
Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nA5KVdve009367; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 14:31:39 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.3+Sun/8.14.3/Submit) id nA5KVdp2009366; Thu, 5 Nov 2009 14:31:39 -0600 (CST)
X-Authentication-Warning: binky.Central.Sun.COM: nw141292 set sender to Nicolas.Williams@sun.com using -f
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 14:31:39 -0600
From: Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Message-ID: <20091105203139.GJ1105@Sun.COM>
References: <73843DF9-EFCB-4B8D-913E-FE2235E5BDD3@rtfm.com> <d3aa5d00911051016p7a0cc508q2090b86de30a50d5@mail.gmail.com> <20091105184615.GG1105@Sun.COM> <d3aa5d00911051109r3d5dae33jef42e9dd2db1b0b@mail.gmail.com> <20091105202130.GH1105@Sun.COM>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20091105202130.GH1105@Sun.COM>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [TLS] TLS renegotiation issue
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
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." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Thu, 05 Nov 2009 20:42:49 -0000

On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 02:21:31PM -0600, Nicolas Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 11:09:51AM -0800, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Nicolas Williams
> > > [...]
> > 
> > This isn't enough. If you look at the diagram you can see that the
> > client never experiences a renegotiation.
> 
> That's one diagram.  There's other cases, but even in the case you

Oh, never mind.  I missed one attack scenario, the one in your doc.

Nico
--