-1 to Tim.
You can tell the reader whatever you want. The fact remains that if the only
way to add QR to the currently deployed TLS-1.2-based “stuff” is modifying
TLS-1.2, then that’s what will be done in that particular case.
I hope that the majority of the installed base would be able to migrate to PQ
and TLS-1.3+ in a normal way. But in all likelihood, “special cases” will
exist.
--
V/R,
Uri
There are two ways to design a system. One is to make it so simple there are
obviously no deficiencies.
The other is to make it so complex there are no obvious deficiencies.
- C. A. R. Hoare
From: TLS <[email protected]> on behalf of Ira McDonald
<[email protected]>
Date: Thursday, December 21, 2023 at 13:39
To: Tim Hollebeek <[email protected]>, Ira McDonald
<[email protected]>
Cc: Hannes Tschofenig <[email protected]>, Bas
Westerbaan <[email protected]>, "Salz, Rich"
<[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXT] Re: [TLS] Adoption call for 'TLS 1.2 Feature Freeze'
+1 to Tim - tell the reader explicitly that they will only ever get PQC w/ TLS
1. 3 or higher. Cheers, - Ira On Thu, Dec 21, 2023, 12: 34 PM Tim Hollebeek
<tim. hollebeek=40digicert. com@ dmarc. ietf. org> wrote: I personally think
this point
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside the Laboratory.
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
+1 to Tim - tell the reader explicitly that they will only ever get PQC w/ TLS
1.3 or higher.
Cheers,
- Ira
On Thu, Dec 21, 2023, 12:34 PM Tim Hollebeek
<[email protected]> wrote:
I personally think this point is important enough to be made explicitly instead
of implicitly.
If we want to communicate loudly and clearly that post-quantum cryptography is
NEVER coming to TLS 1.2, we need to explicitly say that.
Otherwise people will say “I know you said TLS 1.2 was frozen, but post-quantum
cryptography isn’t a feature, it’s a critical security vulnerability that needs
to be patched regardless of any freezes.”
The answer will be and needs to be: “No, we told you clearly and explicitly
that post-quantum cryptography would require moving to TLS 1.3 or later”.
-Tim
From: TLS <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Hannes Tschofenig
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 12:06 PM
To: Salz, Rich <[email protected]>; Hannes Tschofenig
<[email protected]>; Bas Westerbaan
<[email protected]>; Deirdre Connolly
<[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [TLS] Adoption call for 'TLS 1.2 Feature Freeze'
Hi Rich,
that is implied by a "feature freeze". No reason to highlight PQC (even though
it is a hype topic right now).
Ciao
Hannes
Am 11.12.2023 um 17:18 schrieb Salz, Rich:
1. I consider Section 3 "Implications for post-quantum cryptography"
misplaced. I suggest to delete the section
2. The motivation for the draft is unrelated to developments with PQC.
The point is to explain to people that we are going to need PQ crypto, and it
*will not be a 1.2 enhancement*
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
