> On 29 Nov 2023, at 1:14 pm, Ben Schwartz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> This draft is essentially identical to -02 except for the new Appendix A,
> which discuss the impact of Unknown Key-Share Attacks:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-dane-03#name-unknown-key-share-attacks
>
> I would appreciate more review on that section, which attempts a fairly
> tricky security analysis.
>
> Otherwise, I believe this draft is ready for WGLC (except for the
> Acknowledgements section, which still needs to be filled in).
Thanks for this work. I have read the draft and on an initial read-through,
only found a trivial editorial nit:
Section 5.2, second paragraph:
s/To prevents the above .../To prevent the above .../
Otherwise, the text looks good. That said, indeed Appendix A deserves more
care than
an initial read-through.
Do you know whether the requirements of
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110#section-7.4
essentially universally supported by HTTPS (1.1 or later) servers? Or is a
non-trivial,
perhaps significant, minority of servers that would be vulnerable to UKS
despite section 7.4?
The non-HTTPS protocols are easier to reason about, and for these I don't
expect to need to
search for unexplored corner cases.
--
Viktor.
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
