Re: [TLS] draft-green-tls-static-dh-in-tls13-01

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Fri, 07 July 2017 18:44 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
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 E32E71317E3 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.302
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.302 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
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 zi-O0SnvD_yE for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:44:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8D97129A92 for <tls@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 11:44:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0233DBE2F; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 19:44:24 +0100 (IST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jsXNhJ_N55cK; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 19:44:22 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [10.244.2.100] (95-45-153-252-dynamic.agg2.phb.bdt-fng.eircom.net [95.45.153.252]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BD9FABDCC; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 19:44:22 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1499453062; bh=s1tQ2OrRfS17J+TzMCAUKHGfr9XM5+/+GCMX1J5a6HU=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=GoiyxRyWs13GwOUzSA9uGZkBcBMd/Y3/YP1KK0ZZCgP0rqTVEMMur94+rDhDUWNHk 6XZimBeAeU/vWOcsvzzrX11bgfBnIyi4ya1RuwVJTaDb+bFPKalVDBVh6/boka8stB 2YoVJp46m+TgWMCiS5Dpo9dUouA80EWLb+2N0Dtc=
To: Kyle Rose <krose@krose.org>
Cc: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>, IETF TLS <tls@ietf.org>, Matthew Green <matthewdgreen@gmail.com>
References: <CAPCANN-xgf3auqy+pFfL6VO5GpEsCCHYkROAwiB1u=8a4yj+Fg@mail.gmail.com> <CAL02cgRJeauV9NQ2OrGK1ocQtg-M2tbWm2+5HUc4-Wc8KC3vxQ@mail.gmail.com> <71E07F32-230F-447C-B85B-9B3B4146D386@vigilsec.com> <39bad3e9-2e17-30f6-48a7-a035d449dce7@cs.tcd.ie> <CAJU8_nXBFkpncFDy4QFnd6hFpC7oOZn-F1-EuBC2vk3Y6QKq3A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <f0554055-cdd3-a78c-8ab1-e84f9b624fda@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 19:44:22 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAJU8_nXBFkpncFDy4QFnd6hFpC7oOZn-F1-EuBC2vk3Y6QKq3A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="BsGNh49JUqX6VfwHjlt8sKt48vaA5rb5Q"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/pPenwBXvI0PeIAVHOf-gDypss74>
Subject: Re: [TLS] draft-green-tls-static-dh-in-tls13-01
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 18:44:28 -0000


On 07/07/17 19:40, Kyle Rose wrote:
> an informational draft submitted via the ISE

...has nothing to to with this WG and ought consume
no cycles on this list or in meetings.

Yes, the ISE is the route 2804 envisages for documenting
wiretapping schemes such as this.

The authors of this draft however chose to put "standards
track" in the header and some of those authors are very
very well aware of all the nuances here so that was not
a mistake is my conclusion. So I stand by my statement
that 2804 says no to this.

S.