Hi Peter,

> In any case, if the client has a local policy not to use PLAIN (or other 
> mechanisms that it considers to be too weak), then it simply wouldn't 
> use those in case of a downgrade attack. Similar policies are in place 
> already for things like old versions of TLS, see here:

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-uta-rfc7525bis-11#section-3.2

Yes, but if you'll leave PLAIN aside, even different flavors of SCRAM have 
different protection levels.
If, for example, SCRAM-SHA-1 is deemed broken one day, server operators most 
probably will still have to support it for some time, until all clients have 
upgraded their policy to not support SCRAM-SHA-1 anymore.
Not to mention that some server operators may not be aware of this newly 
discovered SCRAM SHA-1 weakness at all.
In this timeframe, an attacker could still downgrade the connection to SCRAM-
SHA-1 even though this is insecure now.
Policies are always a hard cut creating timeframes of opportunity for 
attackers.
Having a downgrade-protection in place will close this timeframe of 
opportunity altogether.

-tmolitor



_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
Unsubscribe: [email protected]
_______________________________________________

Reply via email to