[TLS] Version negotiation (was: Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography performance)
Michael D'Errico <mike-list@pobox.com> Thu, 13 March 2014 01:42 UTC
Return-Path: <mike-list@pobox.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 DAA221A07F5 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 18:42:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.548
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.548 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_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 zW9RiqItSZC5 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 18:42:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com [208.72.237.25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9E9D1A082B for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 18:42:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B8C910632; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 21:42:00 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=message-id :date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=kEjJdqaCSIp2 F3BqaU2c22cd9TQ=; b=oacvvKPi8/tr8hzRvUMM6Gr7JeU2aCgsXacO1c7j3tdD Zqk5LispeRE1uf3vtDfhzRLSLp2knmG5LtorZF676MBK/BOax6AJq9jQkBbj1UpD EpeDw5mlajfdf3xVACMxbSuLVMF5Dt/ixthIWaJO9KW32PhRyWWs/RifarM2eio=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=message-id:date :from:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=KaIoMM wRinIILdr4sM5bpC3cvNgIGeEH6TsiVYOtY9Fae1xG9ft9EKBH0O93zK7Y9+Y2Oz iw43G/JkesBPcbgewPPZrZ87hA8mpqJSVlXRALXH6I6kvigko5LZ0cB02ju93IML VfyvZDH/EfVZxLupTp3s4UntHSIJ2hCg4qm04=
Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 223A610630; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 21:42:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from iMac.local (unknown [24.234.153.62]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 787451062F; Wed, 12 Mar 2014 21:41:59 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <53210CE4.30003@pobox.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 18:41:56 -0700
From: Michael D'Errico <mike-list@pobox.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
References: <CACsn0ckbrrt0rBsHM+5A_jNK6UvkaiO9mHx6=Jr+jjqy+bZ6MQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACsn0ckbrrt0rBsHM+5A_jNK6UvkaiO9mHx6=Jr+jjqy+bZ6MQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Pobox-Relay-ID: AB241162-AA50-11E3-A478-873F0E5B5709-38729857!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/tush6ms9pUTqhUkvwPocG725OoM
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: [TLS] Version negotiation (was: Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography performance)
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, 13 Mar 2014 01:42:10 -0000
Watson Ladd wrote:
> Dear all,
> Below are some thoughts about the TLS 1.3 cryptography....
Is the plan to send client version { 0x03 0x04 } and continue to be
subject to downgrade attacks, version intolerance, etc. that plague
browsers today? Or is there some other way to signify support for
version 1.3?
Mike
- [TLS] Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography performance Watson Ladd
- [TLS] Version negotiation (was: Thoughts on TLS 1… Michael D'Errico
- Re: [TLS] Version negotiation (was: Thoughts on T… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [TLS] Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography perfor… Santosh Chokhani
- Re: [TLS] Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography perfor… Watson Ladd
- Re: [TLS] Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography perfor… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography perfor… Watson Ladd
- Re: [TLS] Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography perfor… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography perfor… Trevor Perrin
- Re: [TLS] Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography perfor… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography perfor… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [TLS] Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography perfor… Nico Williams
- Re: [TLS] Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography perfor… Trevor Perrin
- Re: [TLS] Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography perfor… Watson Ladd
- Re: [TLS] Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography perfor… Trevor Perrin
- Re: [TLS] Thoughts on TLS 1.3 cryptography perfor… Eric Rescorla