I think this text is good. I suggest "Not Recommended" with a note, and if
the IoT groups want to publish their own document updating that note, that
would work.
-Ekr
On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Sean Turner wrote:
> Anybody else has thoughts on this?
>
> spt
>
> > On Oct
Anybody else has thoughts on this?
spt
> On Oct 3, 2017, at 18:53, Sean Turner wrote:
>
> In the IANA registries draft
> (https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates), we’ve added
> a recommended column to the Cipher Suites (CSs) registry (and some others).
Ralph and Russ,
This draft addresses the two main concerns I had with draft-green:
1) Client opt-in
2) On-the wire visibility
There are clearly some details missing from this draft (such as how Ke is
used as a symmetric key), but generally I think this approach is more
explicit and therefore
On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 07:21:01PM +0200, Martin Rex wrote:
> Ilari Liusvaara wrote:
> >
> > And even if the changes might not be directly consequential to
> > security, the changes to get through some more annoying middleboxes
> > might be quite annoying to implement.
>
I did a bit of an update to [1].
As before PRs are welcome and I (still) wonder if the
WG would benefit from documenting bits of this stuff
as a work item to save time and repetition in future.
S.
[1] https://github.com/sftcd/tinfoil
On 08/10/17 23:35, Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL wrote:
>
Ilari Liusvaara wrote:
>
> And even if the changes might not be directly consequential to
> security, the changes to get through some more annoying middleboxes
> might be quite annoying to implement.
>
> E.g. there probably are several different middeboxes that have a
>
Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> two options:
>
> - Try to make small adaptations to TLS 1.3 to make it work better with
> middleboxes.
Return to the proper TLSv1.2 record format with true ContentTypes
(hiding them doesn't add any security anyways).
With the needlessly broken