Subject: Re: [TLS] Industry Concerns about TLS 1.3

From: Peter Gutmann <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2016 11:23:05 +0000

Ryan Carboni <[email-masked]> writes:

>I've never quite understood what TLS was supposed to be protecting against,
>and whether or not it has done so successfully, or has the potential to do so
>successfully.

It's the Inside-Out Thread Model (also shared by a number of other security
protocols, it's not just TLS), "our defence is SSL/TLS/IPsec/PKI/…  and our
threat model is whatever that happens to defend against".  DNSSEC is a classic
example of this, the DNSSEC requirements doc was published *a decade* after
DNSSEC itself.  Mind you, other protocols are still waiting for their
requirements doc to be published.  PKIX specifically actively declined to
consider use cases because heck, this is a standards committee dammit, we
can't be expected to take into account what people want to do with it.

Mind you, in the absence of any success criteria, no-one can say you've
failed...

Peter.

---

From: Ryan Carboni <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 11:07:31 -0700

> Mind you, in the absence of any success criteria, no-one can say you've

It is worth reading this paper apparently from 2010 on reusing ephemeral
keys:

https://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~ajmeneze/publications/ephemeral.pdf

Regardless, I can hope the Snowden disclosures will force people into
action.

But please.

Continue to make the internet secure.