Hubert Kario wrote:
> Martin Rex wrote:
>>
>> Forget TLS extensions, forget ClientHello.client_version.
>> Both in fundamentally broken, and led to Web Browsers coming up
>> with the "downgrade dance" that is target of the POODLE attack.
>>
>> We know fairly reliably what kind of negotiation
On 07/20/2016 05:01 AM, Hanno Böck wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 11:20:46 +0200
> Hubert Kario wrote:
>
>> so it looks to me like while we may gain a bit of compatibility by
>> using extension based mechanism to indicate TLSv1.3,
> Just quick: This was discussed yesterday, David
On 07/20/2016 12:42 AM, Hugo Krawczyk wrote:
>
> Actually, I would suggest that for any such value, we add "collision
> resistance" to the label for that derivation - this would apply to
> resumption/PSK context and to Exporter key (and possibly others)
>
Seems reasonable; space in the label is
On Wednesday, 20 July 2016 14:49:03 CEST Kyle Rose wrote:
> > it's not IETF's fault that the implementers add unspecified by IETF
> > restrictions and limitations to parsers of Client Hello messages or that
> > they can't handle handshake messages split over multiple record layer
> > messages,
On Wednesday, 20 July 2016 12:14:01 CEST Martin Rex wrote:
> Hanno Böck wrote:
>
> Checking application/pgp-signature: FAILURE
>
> > Hubert Kario wrote:
> >> so it looks to me like while we may gain a bit of compatibility by
> >> using extension based mechanism to indicate
Hanno Böck wrote:
Checking application/pgp-signature: FAILURE
> Hubert Kario wrote:
>
>> so it looks to me like while we may gain a bit of compatibility by
>> using extension based mechanism to indicate TLSv1.3,
Forget TLS extensions, forget ClientHello.client_version.
Both
On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 11:20:46 +0200
Hubert Kario wrote:
> so it looks to me like while we may gain a bit of compatibility by
> using extension based mechanism to indicate TLSv1.3,
Just quick: This was discussed yesterday, David Benjamin had an
interesting proposal, but it was
On Monday, 18 July 2016 15:08:03 CEST Hubert Kario wrote:
> On Monday 18 July 2016 13:08:43 Hanno Böck wrote:
> > * We don't have good data on the issue. The latest numbers I could find
> >
> > came from Ivan Ristic in 2013 [4], and from David Benjamin we know he
> > considers the problem to