Hi Peter, too bad that you are not attending the upcoming IETF meeting in person. I am sure that others would like to hear your thoughts about an end-to-end security solution that is even better than the TLS 1.3 protocol. At least I am interested.
Maybe you can share something on the list. Ciao Hannes On 11/07/2017 05:21 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 11/7/17 8:15 AM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote: >> FWIW: I can tell you what the threat model was with the layered TLS work. >> >> Let me give you a very specific example. Imagine a Bluetooth Low Energy >> device that communicates via a phone to a cloud-based service. The >> communication from the phone to the cloud uses HTTPS. The communication >> from the BLE device to the phone uses ordinary BLE >> services/characteristics. >> >> The Layered TLS/application layer TLS would in this case run from the >> BLE device all the way to the cloud-based service at the application layer. >> >> This allows us to provide end-to-end security across a proxy (in this >> case the phone) and independent of the underlying protocols. >> >> Does this make sense? > > Given your assumptions, yes. Although IMHO there's got to be a better > way to accomplish the goal of end-to-end security here. If I were going > to IETF 100, I'd propose getting together for a beer to discuss... > > Peter > > > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls > _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
