Re: [TLS] draft-badra-tls-password-ext-01

Dear Alfred,

Thank you very much for this detailed and useful review. I will integrate
all of these comments in the future version. However, two comments are
in-line..

> Hello,
> after studying the Internet-Draft authored/edited by you,
>                draft-badra-tls-password-ext-01,
> I'd like to submit a few comments.

>      o   Entering a username consisting of up to 128 printable Unicode
>          characters.
>      o   Entering a passphrase of up to 64 octets in length as ASCII
>                  ^^^    ^^^^^^^^^^
> |         strings or in hexadecimal encoding.  The user interface MAY
>                  ^^                               ^^^^
>          accept other encodings if the algorithm for translating the
>          encoding to a binary string is specified.
>
> BTW: Why only 64 octets?

Do you mean that 128 octets is more appropriate?

>
> Furthermore, I strongly recommend to set requirements to ensure
> a minimum entropy of the passphrase.  A simple rule (suitable for
> being checked easily by humans), might be:
>
>   The passphrase SHOULD at least contain 16 different octets, and at
>   least 16 octets (say, x) in the passphrase must have neighbor octets
>   not contained in the set {x-1, x, x+1} (mod 256).
>
> (The latter part aims at excluding long 'runs' of ascending/descending
> sequences.)
>

It seems good for me, please give a reference to recommend that, if any.

>
> (4)  Sections 4 through 6
>
> When the ref. to RFC 4346 is updated to 4346bis, there's no more
> need to also refer to RFC 4366 (or 4366bis), because 4346bis has
> incorporated the Hello extension framework and the draft does not
> make any use of the particular extensions documented in RFC 4366 /
> 4366bis.

OK

>
> Best regards,
>  Alfred H�nes.

Best regards,
Badra

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls