Re: [TLS] draft-badra-tls-password-ext-01
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [TLS] draft-badra-tls-password-ext-01
Dear Alfred,
Thank you very much for this detailed and useful review. I will integrate
all of these comments in the future version. However, two comments are
in-line..
> Hello,
> after studying the Internet-Draft authored/edited by you,
> draft-badra-tls-password-ext-01,
> I'd like to submit a few comments.
> o Entering a username consisting of up to 128 printable Unicode
> characters.
> o Entering a passphrase of up to 64 octets in length as ASCII
> ^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^
> | strings or in hexadecimal encoding. The user interface MAY
> ^^ ^^^^
> accept other encodings if the algorithm for translating the
> encoding to a binary string is specified.
>
> BTW: Why only 64 octets?
Do you mean that 128 octets is more appropriate?
>
> Furthermore, I strongly recommend to set requirements to ensure
> a minimum entropy of the passphrase. A simple rule (suitable for
> being checked easily by humans), might be:
>
> The passphrase SHOULD at least contain 16 different octets, and at
> least 16 octets (say, x) in the passphrase must have neighbor octets
> not contained in the set {x-1, x, x+1} (mod 256).
>
> (The latter part aims at excluding long 'runs' of ascending/descending
> sequences.)
>
It seems good for me, please give a reference to recommend that, if any.
>
> (4) Sections 4 through 6
>
> When the ref. to RFC 4346 is updated to 4346bis, there's no more
> need to also refer to RFC 4366 (or 4366bis), because 4346bis has
> incorporated the Hello extension framework and the draft does not
> make any use of the particular extensions documented in RFC 4366 /
> 4366bis.
OK
>
> Best regards,
> Alfred H�nes.
Best regards,
Badra
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.