> Ideally a solution would work with HTTP/1 over TLS 1.3, HTTP/2 over TLS 1.3, 
> HTTP/2 over TLS 1.2, and for completeness HTTP/1 over TLS 1.2.
Correct, anything less than this will create deployment problems.

> I’d like to point out that I am very interested in this use case, but I’m not 
> sure that this is the solution.
I'm open to alternatives that fix the broken use case. 

> We still get a race condition where several requests might be answered 
> before, after or during authentication depending on the timing of the TLS 
> handshake message vs the HTTP messages.
The idea is that before answering a request that requires client auth, the 
server checks if a client cred is available. If there is no suitable client 
cred available, the request is blocked until the client authenticates. This 
does not necessarily have to block other requests that do not require client 
auth.

Cheers,

Andrei

-----Original Message-----
From: Yoav Nir [mailto:ynir.i...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2015 10:28 AM
To: Andrei Popov <andrei.po...@microsoft.com>
Cc: Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusva...@elisanet.fi>; tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] Commentary on the client authentication presentation slides


> On Aug 10, 2015, at 8:10 PM, Andrei Popov <andrei.po...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Ilari,
> 
>> What sort of usecase you have in mind for this?
> This is to support a fairly common website design where the landing page does 
> not require client auth, but subsequent request to a protected resource 
> triggers client authentication within an existing TLS connection.
> In TLS<=1.2, this was accomplished via renegotiation. In TLS1.3, there is no 
> renegotiation, so we need an alternative solution if we want to support these 
> existing sites over TLS1.3.

I’d like to point out that I am very interested in this use case, but I’m not 
sure that this is the solution.

Such sites were first broken by HTTP/2 which forbade renegotiation. Then they 
were broken again by TLS 1.3 that does not include renegotiation.

Ideally a solution would work with HTTP/1 over TLS 1.3, HTTP/2 over TLS 1.3, 
HTTP/2 over TLS 1.2, and for completeness HTTP/1 over TLS 1.2. 

Assuming that HTTP/2 is the HTTP of the future (meaning that relegating these 
sites to HTTP/1 is a temporary thing), I don’t think that this new mechanism 
fixes the issue with renegotiation that caused httpbis to reject its usage. We 
still get a race condition where several requests might be answered before, 
after or during authentication depending on the timing of the TLS handshake 
message vs the HTTP messages.

It would be useless IMO to create an alternate renegotiation in TLS only for it 
to not be used in HTTP/2.

Yoav

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

Reply via email to