Re: [TLS] Rizzo claims implementation attach, should be interesting

Martin Rex <mrex@sap.com> Wed, 21 September 2011 01:17 UTC

Return-Path: <mrex@sap.com>
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 4F16821F8C76 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 18:17:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.048
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.048 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.201, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jr5qvSmq0cbi for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 18:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpde02.sap-ag.de (smtpde02.sap-ag.de [155.56.68.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D05921F8C61 for <tls@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 18:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sap.corp by smtpde02.sap-ag.de (26) with ESMTP id p8L1JpW4003149 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 21 Sep 2011 03:19:51 +0200 (MEST)
From: Martin Rex <mrex@sap.com>
Message-Id: <201109210119.p8L1Jo9w007503@fs4113.wdf.sap.corp>
To: nico@cryptonector.com (Nico Williams)
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 03:19:50 +0200 (MEST)
In-Reply-To: <CAK3OfOiHddQxi_HGQ94w7tPCQ4Mcr1dRJOABBpcxd95RfNFF9A@mail.gmail.com> from "Nico Williams" at Sep 20, 11 04:04:25 pm
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SAP: out
Cc: asteingruebl@paypal-inc.com, tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] Rizzo claims implementation attach, should be interesting
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: mrex@sap.com
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: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 01:17:30 -0000

Nico Williams wrote:
> 
> I wasn't there.  I don't know what it was designed for.  But here's
> the thing: why shouldn't the designers have assumed that some of the
> data sent over SSL might be untrusted?  On what grounds would it have
> been OK to say "no untrusted data, please"?  And where was this
> restriction documented?

Btw. in my reading, it is documented in TLS v1.0 (rfc2246)

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2246#section-6

                     Any protocol designed for use over TLS must be
   carefully designed to deal with all possible attacks against it.

-Martin