IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [TLS] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5288 (4694)

Rick van Rein <rick@openfortress.nl> Sun, 15 May 2016 18:43 UTC

Return-Path: <rick@openfortress.nl>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B43D12D1BB for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 May 2016 11:43:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.621
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.621 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Pyn0kb32rP7P for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 May 2016 11:43:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lb2-smtp-cloud2.xs4all.net (lb2-smtp-cloud2.xs4all.net [194.109.24.25]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0662C12D1AC for <tls@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 May 2016 11:43:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from airhead.local ([83.161.146.46]) by smtp-cloud2.xs4all.net with ESMTP id uijg1s00610HQrX01ijh06; Sun, 15 May 2016 20:43:47 +0200
Message-ID: <5738C35B.2070504@openfortress.nl>
Date: Sun, 15 May 2016 20:43:39 +0200
From: Rick van Rein <rick@openfortress.nl>
User-Agent: Postbox 3.0.11 (Macintosh/20140602)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Peter Gutmann <pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
References: <20160514082717.7997D180004@rfc-editor.org> <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4C80CD0@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz>
In-Reply-To: <9A043F3CF02CD34C8E74AC1594475C73F4C80CD0@uxcn10-5.UoA.auckland.ac.nz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/okurT6lw-07SfRxo_IYdIxMuQFk>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 15 May 2016 17:37:10 -0700
Cc: "sean+ietf@sn3rd.com" <sean+ietf@sn3rd.com>, "Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com" <Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>, "mcgrew@cisco.com" <mcgrew@cisco.com>, "jsalowey@cisco.com" <jsalowey@cisco.com>, "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, "abhijitc@cisco.com" <abhijitc@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [TLS] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC5288 (4694)
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sun, 15 May 2016 18:43:55 -0000

Hi,

> I think the erratum needs an erratum.  Firstly, "nonce" doesn't mean "number
> used once", and secondly nonce re-use in AES-GCM doesn't just result in
> "catastrophic failure of it's authenticity", it results in catastrophic
> failure of the entire mode, both confidentiality and integrity/authenticity.

I'd like to add that I don't see a difference between a "failure" and a
"catastrophic failure".  It's probably better to stay away from subjective
words like that.

-Rick

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email