Re: [TLS] No cypher overlap
Hubert Kario <hkario@redhat.com> Mon, 03 August 2015 11:36 UTC
Return-Path: <hkario@redhat.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 654991A8779 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Aug 2015 04:36:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 YfnlHcTS8HS6 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Aug 2015 04:36:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 444311A8799 for <tls@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Aug 2015 04:36:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E95F923B3; Mon, 3 Aug 2015 11:36:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pintsize.usersys.redhat.com (dhcp-0-122.brq.redhat.com [10.34.0.122]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t73BaSbL007205 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 3 Aug 2015 07:36:30 -0400
From: Hubert Kario <hkario@redhat.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2015 13:36:22 +0200
Message-ID: <2591292.9iByWAuqya@pintsize.usersys.redhat.com>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.9 (Linux/4.1.3-200.fc22.x86_64; KDE/4.14.9; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <871tfm1zgl.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
References: <8087760.Ce9A43SzlW@pintsize.usersys.redhat.com> <2289724.pXJjcWpFTc@pintsize.usersys.redhat.com> <871tfm1zgl.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart3429121.iyH3O6k2kQ"; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.24
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/xy5dXb_LcHxDEcXRx81ahbAIApI>
Cc: tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] No cypher overlap
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 03 Aug 2015 11:36:34 -0000
On Saturday 01 August 2015 23:16:42 Florian Weimer wrote: > * Hubert Kario: > > On Tuesday 28 July 2015 16:01:55 Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > >> In that case, it should be said that a client MUST NOT advertise > >> TLS 1.3 unless it offers at least one of the TLS 1.3 MTI ciphers > >> (or perhaps less restrictive at least one TLS 1.3 compatible cipher). > > > > MTI does not mean Mandatory To Enable > > Are you sure? That's extremely surprising. yes, I'm sure: per https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5246#page-65 >9. Mandatory Cipher Suites > > In the absence of an application profile standard specifying > otherwise, a TLS-compliant application MUST implement the cipher > suite TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA (see Appendix A.5 for the > definition). -- Regards, Hubert Kario Quality Engineer, QE BaseOS Security team Web: www.cz.redhat.com Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkyňova 99/71, 612 45, Brno, Czech Republic
- [TLS] No cypher overlap (was: ban more old crap) Hubert Kario
- Re: [TLS] No cypher overlap (was: ban more old cr… Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: [TLS] No cypher overlap (was: ban more old cr… Hubert Kario
- Re: [TLS] No cypher overlap Florian Weimer
- Re: [TLS] No cypher overlap Florian Weimer
- Re: [TLS] No cypher overlap Martin Rex
- Re: [TLS] No cypher overlap Hubert Kario
- Re: [TLS] No cypher overlap Simon Josefsson