On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 02:05:00PM +0100, Matt Caswell wrote: > Draft 28 defines the inappropriate_fallback alert as follows: > > inappropriate_fallback Sent by a server in response to an invalid > connection retry attempt from a client > > With the introduction of the downgrade protection sentinels it now seems > that an inappropriate fallback could also be detected by the client. > Should this wording be changed?
Well, *fallback* specifically is inherently client-driven; the things the client could detect would be more of an incorrectly negotiated version (presumably due to an active attack). -Ben _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
