Subject: [Uta] Deb Cooley's Discuss on draft-ietf-uta-require-tls13-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
From: Deb Cooley via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
To: "The IESG" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 12:47:19 -0700
List-Id: UTA working group mailing list <uta.ietf.org>

Deb Cooley has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-uta-require-tls13-10: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-uta-require-tls13/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 6, para 3, sentence 1:  All Finite Field DH?  Or all except those using
ephemeral FFDH specified in RFC7919?  If FFDHE with one of RFC7919 groups are
used, what is the vulnerability?  I think you could add the word 'most' in
front of 'finite field DH'.  And you could reference RFC 7919, but I won't
require it.  [I will note that TLS1.3 allows FFDHE]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to Hillarie Orman for their secdir review.

Title:  While I'm not generally a fan of suggesting title changes, it may be
warranted here.  Perhaps, 'New Protocols Utilizing TLS Must Require TLS 1.3'.

Abstract:  I think you are burying the lead here.  Perhaps:  'TLS 1.3 use is
widespread, it has had comprehensive security proofs, and it improves both
security and privacy over TLS 1.2.  Therefore, new protocols that use TLS must
require TLS 1.3.  As DTLS 1.3 is not widely available or deployed, this
prescription does not pertain to DTLS (in any DTLS version); it pertains to TLS
only.

This document updates RFC9325, discusses post-quantum cryptography and the
security and privacy improvements over TLS 1.2 as a rationale for that update.'

Introduction:  For similar reasons (burying the lead), I would put the third
para first, and then swap the first and second paragraph (some small changes
will be needed - remove 'also').

Section 6, para 2:  'extension points'?  maybe just 'extensions'?  [or add
'points' to all the places 'extension' is used in the para.