Re: [TLS] Security concerns around co-locating TLS and non-secure on same port (WGLC: draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-08)

Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@oracle.com> Tue, 09 November 2010 03:58 UTC

Return-Path: <Nicolas.Williams@oracle.com>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D19F828C1A8; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 19:58:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.461
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.461 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.137, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lsAeDIAPxki5; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 19:58:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com (rcsinet10.oracle.com [148.87.113.121]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9F9E28C1A5; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 19:58:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com (acsinet15.oracle.com [141.146.126.227]) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id oA93wVDW012666 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 9 Nov 2010 03:58:32 GMT
Received: from acsmt354.oracle.com (acsmt354.oracle.com [141.146.40.154]) by acsinet15.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.1) with ESMTP id oA848Q12023707; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 03:58:30 GMT
Received: from abhmt002.oracle.com by acsmt354.oracle.com with ESMTP id 759497591289275040; Mon, 08 Nov 2010 19:57:20 -0800
Received: from oracle.com (/129.153.128.104) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 08 Nov 2010 19:57:20 -0800
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 21:57:15 -0600
From: Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@oracle.com>
To: Marsh Ray <marsh@extendedsubset.com>
Subject: Re: [TLS] Security concerns around co-locating TLS and non-secure on same port (WGLC: draft-ietf-tsvwg-iana-ports-08)
Message-ID: <20101109035715.GB6536@oracle.com>
References: <E1PFKZ3-0002jp-Bu@login01.fos.auckland.ac.nz> <p06240843c8fd6c508084@130.129.55.1> <20101108201218.GN6536@oracle.com> <AANLkTinxOvwMXGTH0eOifYQ_vMBx-ZfmOrCD_O=7msHn@mail.gmail.com> <20101108222257.GV6536@oracle.com> <AANLkTi=Z8p11rfRyiWdaY75pNQPxWhy+bQTJWAEkm1Yo@mail.gmail.com> <20101108233048.GW6536@oracle.com> <4CD8B652.50907@extendedsubset.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4CD8B652.50907@extendedsubset.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2010-03-02)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 00:06:07 -0800
Cc: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, tls@ietf.org, tsvwg@ietf.org, Richard Hartmann <richih.mailinglist@gmail.com>
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tsvwg>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 03:58:12 -0000

On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 08:47:46PM -0600, Marsh Ray wrote:
> Are people actually making that many new app protocols not based on
> TCP port 443?

I see lots of port 80 stuff still.  Don't you?  Do you live in a better
world than I do?  :)

> It seems like the general trend is to run all new things over TCP
> 443 whether it fits the HTTP 'web services' model or not. Because,
> ironically, everything else is more likely to be "managed" out of
> existence by the firewall admin. :-)
> 
> Microsoft, for example, has that VPN protocol that transparently
> multiplexes on that port. There's also the "next protocol
> notification" proposal being circulated.

Well, it's true that because of firewalls everything runs on ports 80
and 443, often doing CONNECT.

Nico
--