Re: [TLS] Encrypt-then-MAC again (was Re: padding bug)

Peter Gutmann <> Thu, 28 November 2013 11:32 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B295D1AE036 for <>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 03:32:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.002
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aATnF_FSUeNw for <>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 03:32:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 284D91ADF5B for <>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 03:32:34 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;;; q=dns/txt; s=uoa; t=1385638356; x=1417174356; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=LKUsnsqGhxxkhFaH8csh9qxOi9ipbFJzh4BSBEwvGqo=; b=WRXjX/TTiURhrCRkqyEFuQ4c1552+EC87Pj6GksfkExp9Vp3q25xLvbh c44BTYJQIhxa/UlJWnE5KntbhldETuD0Ai8xPil1wJYAa/wAvt18EhMgs 3j0Kmqk3jbhgDz0l/B6oYhVq0KimXMAL/KiAmlZhgzpvp8vXprvofwjgD A=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,790,1378814400"; d="scan'208";a="295430175"
X-Ironport-Source: - Outgoing - Outgoing
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 29 Nov 2013 00:32:30 +1300
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 00:32:29 +1300
From: Peter Gutmann <>
To: "<>" <>
Thread-Topic: [TLS] Encrypt-then-MAC again (was Re: padding bug)
Thread-Index: Ac7sLYUj8fxPetFNSxmzMY7tNy/bWg==
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 11:32:29 +0000
Message-ID: <>
Accept-Language: en-NZ, en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-NZ
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [TLS] Encrypt-then-MAC again (was Re: padding bug)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 28 Nov 2013 11:32:39 -0000

Michael D'Errico <> writes:

>In trying to figure out what's stalling the encrypt-then-mac draft

What's stalling the draft is that the WG chairs refuse to accept it, and
nothing else.  This is a simple, trivial fix for a decade-old problem that's
come back to bite us again and again, that several implementations have
already implemented, and that a straw poll on the list a while back indicated
had general support.  In other words the requirements for rough consensus and
running code was met some time ago.

Therefore, I propose a second straw poll to follow the earlier one:

 The WG chairs have refused to accept a draft containing a simple,
 straightforward fix to a serious problem in TLS' crypto, one that has rough
 consensus and running code.  I therefore propose a vote of no-confidence in
 the TLS WG chairs, since I have no confidence that they're acting in the best
 interests of TLS development and TLS users.

To get things started, I'll vote no-confidence in the TLS WG chairs.