[TLS] CCS and key reset and renegotiation

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Thu, 05 June 2014 15:12 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98CB11A02B2 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 08:12:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.15
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.15 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham
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 HPtLGZ-I2FKt for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 08:11:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com [96.6.114.112]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CA7B1A02E6 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 08:09:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4EA04821F for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 15:09:32 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com (prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com [172.27.22.71]) by prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFF384825A for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 15:09:32 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from usma1ex-cashub.kendall.corp.akamai.com (usma1ex-cashub4.kendall.corp.akamai.com [172.27.105.20]) by prod-mail-relay08.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3A329803E for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 15:09:32 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.107.26]) by USMA1EX-CASHUB4.kendall.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.105.20]) with mapi; Thu, 5 Jun 2014 11:09:30 -0400
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: "TLS@ietf.org (tls@ietf.org)" <tls@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 11:09:30 -0400
Thread-Topic: CCS and key reset and renegotiation
Thread-Index: Ac+Az/QcwlPSWuXNSkaoBvA5Idc1BA==
Message-ID: <2A0EFB9C05D0164E98F19BB0AF3708C7130F434981@USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_2A0EFB9C05D0164E98F19BB0AF3708C7130F434981USMBX1msgcorp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/sGGqWyjCsDu2QuUyTh2_RQU_9fA
Subject: [TLS] CCS and key reset and renegotiation
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
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." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 15:12:03 -0000

Have folks seen this yet?
  http://ccsinjection.lepidum.co.jp/blog/2014-06-05/CCS-Injection-en/index.html

I think it adds weight to my concern about using ChangeCipherSpec to do key reset.  I still prefer the trade-offs of having a "slow the TLS but keep the TCP layer open" and starting over.  Much simpler to prove it's correct.

                /r$

--
Principal Security Engineer
Akamai Technologies, Cambridge, MA
IM: rsalz@jabber.me<mailto:rsalz@jabber.me>; Twitter: RichSalz