IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Trans] The RFC6979 requirement in RFC6962-bis is bad

Linus Nordberg <linus@sunet.se> Tue, 23 May 2017 10:00 UTC

Return-Path: <linus@sunet.se>
X-Original-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DBB3129A92 for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 May 2017 03:00:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.092
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (bad RSA signature)" header.d=sunet.se
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 Hd7gOBa5j4hS for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 May 2017 03:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from e-mailfilter02.sunet.se (e-mailfilter02.sunet.se [IPv6:2001:6b0:8:2::202]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5D291296D2 for <trans@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 May 2017 03:00:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp1.nordu.net (smtp1.nordu.net [109.105.111.32]) by e-mailfilter02.sunet.se (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4+deb7u1) with ESMTP id v4NA0WmW019733 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 23 May 2017 12:00:32 +0200
Received: from flogsta (smtp.adb-centralen.se [IPv6:2001:6b0:8:0:0:0:0:129] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp1.nordu.net (8.15.2/8.14.7) with ESMTPSA id v4NA0Nkr020373 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 23 May 2017 10:00:29 GMT
VBR-Info: md=sunet.se; mc=all; mv=swamid.se
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=sunet.se; s=default; t=1495533632; bh=LmbwjPrFvYPXjC8nQGYXbtXo6AmRRJN19s0yENBVrtk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To; b=N2/haq29Q8HWpw/FzCKMqiqJs0hJqNazPPLEYb2EputDQNxru0bBmoBZfpP0zf2yf wKScS7mYFfncETXdkJfdbARTXK1CEjDq4NZIX5V36wHc+efzJVc44qLloIGcWKB0B5 ZH+hmyh8EtLcJDtxcqqlpRRavMD+5l46mmyqcOXQ=
From: Linus Nordberg <linus@sunet.se>
To: Eran Messeri <eranm@google.com>
Cc: "trans@ietf.org" <trans@ietf.org>, Gary Belvin <gdb@google.com>
Organization: Sunet
References: <CAFewVt5z3sq-Occ1VaHeNeBvt1yyCM_3_nssZSu2f_PBEL4SFQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+cU71kBmKsxyvsmpuF6UAzP+fict3v62gEq_iKY-O2P07ZRLw@mail.gmail.com> <87pofiif6g.fsf@nordberg.se> <CA+cU71kVV_o30p-+dGdLT9Hpg+iiW5KgG-9xJD9iVCEHwhLg6w@mail.gmail.com> <CALzYgEeHpxRSxpQTSPasdahWXdzV8bGMV_R4HM02oscHrm8TWw@mail.gmail.com> <87inl25r8l.fsf@nordberg.se> <CALzYgEdunZXRmGtStGhfJHdHeytk3etYLNtAvFgf3bN2-6EyXQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALzYgEeCVnWG19F79OSwCC+iPArZbGGaBZYrKP2MWWdEDGVHVg@mail.gmail.com> <871srhvunx.fsf@nordberg.se> <CADgN-woFUCU-LiYgZt-i+wnRXzjTmruCXCz=4pruNV4qwj_=og@mail.gmail.com> <87shjwu6zz.fsf@nordberg.se> <CALzYgEc4AW9kHwrq3HK__zCKnU86sqx459B8u5DeEU95eFFYvg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 12:00:44 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CALzYgEc4AW9kHwrq3HK__zCKnU86sqx459B8u5DeEU95eFFYvg@mail.gmail.com> (Eran Messeri's message of "Tue, 23 May 2017 10:41:49 +0100")
Message-ID: <87poezq4dv.fsf@nordberg.se>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) on 192.36.171.202
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.74
X-p0f-Info: os=unknown unknown, link=Ethernet or modem
X-CanIt-Geo: ip=109.105.111.32; country=SE; latitude=59.3247; longitude=18.0560; http://maps.google.com/maps?q=59.3247,18.0560&z=6
X-CanItPRO-Stream: outbound-nordu-net:outbound (inherits from outbound-nordu-net:default, nordu-net:default, base:default)
X-Canit-Stats-ID: 0aTnK0w81 - 7552954de9d6 - 20170523
X-CanIt-Archive-Cluster: PfMRe/vJWMiXwM2YIH5BVExnUnw
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/IFsZ6l4Ygn9FeNA8NRzIcfwBg0w>
Subject: Re: [Trans] The RFC6979 requirement in RFC6962-bis is bad
X-BeenThere: trans@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Public Notary Transparency working group discussion list <trans.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/trans/>
List-Post: <mailto:trans@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 10:00:38 -0000

Eran Messeri <eranm@google.com> wrote
Tue, 23 May 2017 10:41:49 +0100:

> (2) while the extensions field is currently unused, clients are required to
> ignore any extension they do not understand, so a log may put arbitrary
> data there.

You're right. So it's not impossible to track clients using the
extension field but at least it's visible.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email