Re: [TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-negotiated-ff-dhe-02.txt

[Geoffrey Keating <[e-mail]>]

Peter Gutmann <[e-mail]> writes:

> Alyssa Rowan <[e-mail]> writes:
> 
> >No, it's blessing them even to list them. People will probably implement what
> >we specify.
> 
> So put in a note saying that use isn't recommended.  This isn't a bunch of
> Windows PCs with automatic update turned on, its unknown millions of embedded
> devices whose firmware is updated when the device falls apart and gets
> replaced, and for which you may get away with a small tweak from time to time
> but can't do any significant re-engineering once it's type-approved ("it
> works, don't touch it any more").

As a rule, devices whose firmware isn't/won't/can't be updated, won't
implement any new RFC, including this one.  So we are writing this RFC
for devices whose firmware will be updated and which are willing to
adopt 21st century technologies like ECDH or 2048-bit DH.

(And, for the record, I think it's insane to be even considering
standardising anything to do with 768-bit DH other than MUST NOT use
it!)