On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 5:18 PM Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 5:12 PM Jan Schaumann <jschauma= > [email protected]> wrote: > >> "allows for an active quantum attack that achieves >> MITM," >> >> "achieving MITM" doesn't seem quite accurate. What's >> accomplished is a quantum attack to decrypt the data >> in transit, which, to me, anyway, is different from >> posing successfully as a MitM and is more of a >> successful eavesdrop. Mallory has powers Eve does >> not, but a kex compromise only yields eavesdropping >> capability, no? >> > > I tend to agree that MITM isn't quite the right term here. > > If you have access to the traffic keys you certainly can mount > a MITM attack, but you can also just take over the connection > and impersonate the server entirely, or, as you suggest, > just eavesdrop. > Maybe "PHH" -> "post-handshake hijacking" thanks, Rob
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
