IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Unbearable] 0-RTT Token Binding: When to switch exporters?

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Thu, 02 March 2017 00:52 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: unbearable@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: unbearable@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D01F8129459 for <unbearable@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 16:52:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 AHd_SWWNrE5D for <unbearable@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 16:52:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-x232.google.com (mail-qk0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B7A4B12952C for <unbearable@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 16:52:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-x232.google.com with SMTP id u188so100104895qkc.2 for <unbearable@ietf.org>; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 16:52:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=7fq4CQj81hBab8MvkTBN1Fv3kEgVJoYEiXP7Kb+Ljn0=; b=H2HWC7bAD0VKcZ4Hc+6rCBeGlU7tnfKOxrVSIo2paR9M+ZWpnSoJsvfvYUIukrGEoC irA0KJUm3QSPs1ldb3jiiYR+opAdcrf46tA+8iHA90e4jyrj7Yo6XFLPx53427oBNfK0 +ttbsfIfq/d0paxKK2+bcXEJAaIBsFihv7qQT2/BSwXDYmkmE9y7vSKvXYthbLdZ57tI yKH0T+K2rlRqg9AT0H1yX0sP7NBnFLiWh0G2pUPH0JbQ8XCF934i/iB0TSRpaXETHVY4 u2/r4GWiR++cVMaQMc8I30o/zMy63ZTKPI7N3R/cUJZ0DMvZTSlDjHg+H0As02RoV+HK QRPA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=7fq4CQj81hBab8MvkTBN1Fv3kEgVJoYEiXP7Kb+Ljn0=; b=e8YHMurswCxNT/PQO5aQAjCnEL7wS1Exvr1HDtCBjo2FBOnR+z0EbyJIEHDGMfxhqX l9nLhiGenEriVWcQD/wgIUUG927iiBuiGUy5IZeQ36O2lYmIt88SDqyYx42sBYMNVgFs r6LfC2+8XvAf427j1rvLablgnw1qKdFrfAuX0HA1h0g7rWH8KJjQkNECeAMBiVT7ypzX QhPh1bl7i1OXtfsfhxpVhxR3MvQgQi5zZbtmsUTLZbHTkOuZ+CG+7JqsDHhw9ByY52L4 GUh4ZFda8vMtgUuviASP5JbvrEteH/l9w+G6Ppyz7X0eqZ9xJ6ZJO5D4T+/ZFL3JP2ng yUjw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39m7zdh4k3UCcCj7sIcN4UwrEnt8xQynwQNA6Bf53WY4whRbfaI3msk1CExvl5Ua4t4ooW1mjC4Y3IZg0g==
X-Received: by 10.237.34.250 with SMTP id q55mr14297662qtc.144.1488415955917; Wed, 01 Mar 2017 16:52:35 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.19.112 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 16:52:35 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CACdeXiKQjaoAArLBcjRj+kUJUqH+f1bA5yeCCiQ6GMXzWJURBw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACdeXiK2Hs=Kz_5OFryWR+9_t6nDL_p7NKjw=CwRsua_E5S9Mw@mail.gmail.com> <DM2PR0301MB084793F58146F8574BF36EE18C780@DM2PR0301MB0847.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CACdeXiJGcsTxrSWmd5BZrfoWTHhFF3+RisQFD628iYNMzZakhQ@mail.gmail.com> <CACdeXiJFe7-jM9qEnNB+Wp3joGxF_X1z+-dPywb9SRZuSNmAzQ@mail.gmail.com> <DM2PR21MB0091E3F087E1AECA3A63A3788C560@DM2PR21MB0091.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <CACdeXi+YjLaXtoX47LtVK4Ay2y-mCOOraV46gbbbuQPL40ngXg@mail.gmail.com> <DM2PR21MB00910C83983BEE885B0E04288C560@DM2PR21MB0091.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <CACdeXiLON5OAjfFCNsenCeaGV3a_LDoi17VAk=fSzF0YA5=f7Q@mail.gmail.com> <CACdeXiLNCrPSz0_hZSpQ6tsoHB7ryJ2dCnHjUYwu5vu5fO4XBg@mail.gmail.com> <SN1PR21MB0096D7426A4E230E284F0D058C560@SN1PR21MB0096.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <CACdeXiKuzNh0fP9b-jEF82m-6mX+i04To96GMa_tFNcuznGn+A@mail.gmail.com> <DM2PR21MB00914BA07BA984E931B88FEB8C290@DM2PR21MB0091.namprd21.prod.outlook.com> <CACdeXiKQjaoAArLBcjRj+kUJUqH+f1bA5yeCCiQ6GMXzWJURBw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2017 11:52:35 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnV0+vumfkZAMRZ_8q5pTkwf_CqhZ+deeVWdbF9SFaHoJw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nick Harper <nharper@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/unbearable/KJVh-b5D0yKhKoY-RvkdgVsYGC8>
Cc: Andrei Popov <Andrei.Popov@microsoft.com>, IETF Tokbind WG <unbearable@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Unbearable] 0-RTT Token Binding: When to switch exporters?
X-BeenThere: unbearable@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "\"This list is for discussion of proposals for doing better than bearer tokens \(e.g. HTTP cookies, OAuth tokens etc.\) for web applications. The specific goal is chartering a WG focused on preventing security token export and replay attacks.\"" <unbearable.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/unbearable>, <mailto:unbearable-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/unbearable/>
List-Post: <mailto:unbearable@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:unbearable-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/unbearable>, <mailto:unbearable-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2017 00:52:39 -0000

Would it help to include a clear signal about which keys are intended
to be exported and used?

On 2 March 2017 at 11:39, Nick Harper <nharper@google.com> wrote:
> Does the solution I described upthread (where the client switches
> exporters soon after the handshake completes, but not necessarily
> immediately after) sound reasonable, or do we still need to discuss
> whether we should have any support whatsoever for a
> TokenBindingMessage in 0-RTT application data? If there are no
> objections to the upthread solution, I'd like to work on fleshing out
> the details and revising the I-D.
>
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Andrei Popov
> <Andrei.Popov@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>> For HTTP, that option would mean a client resuming a connection and sending 0-RTT data can only send in 0-RTT data requests that have no cookies (or other potentially bound tokens), which is a very limited use case.
>> Agreed, this is indeed a limited use-case. But so is 0-RTT application data, if one attempts to use it securely.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unbearable mailing list
> Unbearable@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/unbearable

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email