[TLS] possible new work item: not breaking TLS
Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Thu, 13 July 2017 12:00 UTC
Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23C48127B60 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Jul 2017 05:00:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wCf0YIv2PHCj for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Jul 2017 05:00:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83C70126557 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Jul 2017 05:00:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52753BE5F; Thu, 13 Jul 2017 13:00:07 +0100 (IST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lVxl2Vx6U1yb; Thu, 13 Jul 2017 13:00:07 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [134.226.36.93] (bilbo.dsg.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.36.93]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1898ABE5C; Thu, 13 Jul 2017 13:00:07 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1499947207; bh=IYrKKw7IsPWBomzRqJ0HmawetVegJL3VsvYJ5+1hmTA=; h=To:Cc:From:Subject:Date:From; b=EXaxHw2nv7JdmW7RtFMRX0zizSOPodjlCxHZ5914iJgpP8r5wFN8nleCmWwzRl25K S/Si7z6Wge60RBIgR27Id4zOEQoVih4wA4i8e3rMXcDFMr0ycskoVUbNNe4jre2Zt0 ktIYW+fKshAbjVXHxT/gp16GoG+IzdWkCk0CK3ZM=
To: tls chair <tls-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Cc: "tls@ietf.org" <tls@ietf.org>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <f7a9beb6-ad71-89a9-22b8-05126e30170b@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 13:00:06 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="soBSJclCM0SXaNV8RLfJPAxdIuKULAIso"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/ItWLpIe4IvEGJF86cv_8tLjTpYw>
Subject: [TLS] possible new work item: not breaking TLS
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 12:00:16 -0000
Hi again TLS WG chairs, I've done a bit more work on the collection of arguments against the latest break-TLS proposal. [1] I plan to keep working on that so more input is welcome. (Corrections where I've gotten stuff wrong are even more welcome.) I'd like to again request some time on the agenda to allow discussion of those points in a more structured manner than will be possible during the mic-line scrum that'll likely follow a sales-pitch for draft-green. I'd also like to ask the WG if we think it'd be useful to document the arguments against that and other "let's break-tls" proposals we've seen in the past in an RFC. If people think it would be useful, I'd be willing to do work to edit such a draft, or help edit that. Thanks, S. [1] https://github.com/sftcd/tinfoil
- [TLS] possible new work item: not breaking TLS Stephen Farrell
- Re: [TLS] possible new work item: not breaking TLS Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL
- Re: [TLS] possible new work item: not breaking TLS Joseph Lorenzo Hall
- Re: [TLS] possible new work item: not breaking TLS Stephen Farrell