Re: [TLS] Call for consensus to remove anonymous DH

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Dave Garrett <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 06:55:02 pm Nico Williams wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 02:25:52PM -0700, Brian Smith wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > > In addition, they are already part of TLS, so the question would be
> if we
> > > > have consensus to remove them....
> > >
> > > This thread  is about the removal of DH_anon_*, not about raw public
> keys.
> >
> > Yes, but you implied that you might not support keeping raw public keys.
> >
> > I'm not in favor of removing the anon cipher suites if we also remove
> > raw public key support.  This is important.  I don't want the cost of
> > doing anon with TLS to escalate piecemeal.  All cards on the table
> > please.
>
> This appears to just be a miscommunication.
>
> On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 05:38:05 pm Eric Rescorla wrote:
> > This proposal is to remove Anon, thus making things strictly simpler,
> since
> > Raw keys can replace Anon but not the other way around. One might imagine
> > a proposal to remove Raw keys, but that's not the question here and even
> if
> > that failed (as I expect it would) things will still be simpler if we
> > remove Anon.
>
> The current poll is to remove anon ciphers in favor of raw public keys.
> We're not considering removing raw public keys, as far as I know, and I
> think most of us would be against that.


Isn't this what I said?

-Ekr


>
>
> Dave
>