Re: [TLS] draft-rescorla-tls-renegotiate and MITM resistance

To: tls at ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] draft-rescorla-tls-renegotiate and MITM resistance
From: David-Sarah Hopwood <david-sarah at jacaranda.org>
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:34:55 +0000
Delivered-to: tls at core3.amsl.com
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:content-type; bh=YXX+nDs/3t3Tx2P3SJ2UO0Zlb0U26scKWlMNV/KdsIY=; b=dcryMtjd8sVU0YnoYh7GClqf9V4DmWD4m6XTkOYjzd5J3/nkEEYaoTL8a+4TA+EINn TQewx3xhh/rhCJxMwCN8dDPR/IlKYbL/qgl0Aw/CcWS9oIIxEX6+QYX3lRMmtAZyotnb kIc2I46zyjV0Hf8FlQBNMRcmFza0fuqY0QCyE=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type; b=iOzz2Kj9FFT4tVxIfXZ9QwN6u0n3bnYiJSDEU1H64DNTtbzMGRLErCWwgK+6PutMTK Rx9vxPHg2VkPWesaHq3tDUSX/ogb0HkjWMKpYKRsNquElr4j+7tJRNiScb02FSo5U8Nt vAiSlC10lGRve9w7FYvpulODKsYNSVI8lx7z0=
In-reply-to: <4AF81CFF.8010803 at extendedsubset.com>
List-archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls>
List-help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <CE2A65CAAFE55048BA6682475F9A7DBF5EA6E59A16 at ACLMAIL01.corp.audiocodes.com> <4AF81CFF.8010803 at extendedsubset.com>
Sender: David-Sarah Hopwood <djhopwood at googlemail.com>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.8.1.3) Gecko/20070326 Thunderbird/2.0.0.0 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666

Marsh Ray wrote:
> Yair Elharrar wrote:
>> In addition, until such time that all clients in the world start
>> supporting this extension (e.g. kiosks in airports), servers will
>> have to support backward compatibility.
> 
> It will be a trade-off for each server admin to weigh and decide their
> policy. I suspect many admins will prefer not to allow insecure
> connections from unpatched airport kiosks.

To prevent this attack, they don't have to disallow connections, only
renegotiations in which the extension is not used.

-- 
David-Sarah Hopwood  ⚥  http://davidsarah.livejournal.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [TLS] draft-rescorla-tls-renegotiate and MITM resistance
  - From: Yoav Nir
- Re: [TLS] draft-rescorla-tls-renegotiate and MITM resistance
  - From: Yair Elharrar

References:
- [TLS] draft-rescorla-tls-renegotiate and MITM resistance
  - From: Yair Elharrar
- Re: [TLS] draft-rescorla-tls-renegotiate and MITM resistance
  - From: Marsh Ray

Prev by Date: Re: [TLS] draft-rescorla-tls-renegotiate and MITM resistance
Next by Date: Re: [TLS] draft-rescorla-tls-renegotiate and MITM resistance
Previous by thread: Re: [TLS] draft-rescorla-tls-renegotiate and MITM resistance
Next by thread: Re: [TLS] draft-rescorla-tls-renegotiate and MITM resistance
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Re: [TLS] draft-rescorla-tls-renegotiate and MITM resistance

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.