Re: [TLS] simplistic renego protection

[Stefan Santesson <stefan at aaa-sec.com>]

I fully agree,

However, just because a server accepts renegotiation with an unpatched
client, does not necessarily mean that the service provided over TLS is
vulnerable.

One example is if authentication is performed with proper channel binding in
a layer above TLS and the service is provided under that security context.

I second that lenient server - unpatched client must work while ensuring
that lenient server - lenient client can't be abused using downgrade
attacks.

/Stefan


On 09-11-20 5:24 AM, "Michael D'Errico" <mike-list at pobox.com> wrote:

> Yes.
> 
> Some servers apparently cannot function without renegotiation.
> They will need to continue providing service to unpatched
> clients for some amount of time and thus remain vulnerable.