I think the performance enhancement (in terms of handshakes per second) that
you get by reusing ephemeral keys is so great, that we have to assume people
will do it. You don’t have to keep the keys indefinitely. It’s fine to
generate a new key every second or ten seconds or so.
Which makes run
On 15/11/2016 07:36, "TLS on behalf of Martin Thomson"
wrote:
>On 15 November 2016 at 16:12, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
>wrote:
>> TLDR; the privacy offered by this extension is the same as the privacy
>> of DTLS over UDP.
>
>I disagree. All the privacy considerations of the QUIC connection ID
>app
On 15 November 2016 at 17:34, Fossati, Thomas (Nokia - GB)
wrote:
> The draft proposes two ways to allocate the identifier (see 3rd para of
> https://thomas-fossati.github.io/draft-tls-cid/#rfc.section.1):
> 1. Server decides unilaterally a value that is fixed for the duration of
> the session (Se
On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 18:10 +0900, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 15 November 2016 at 17:34, Fossati, Thomas (Nokia - GB)
> wrote:
> >
> > The draft proposes two ways to allocate the identifier (see 3rd
> > para of
> > https://thomas-fossati.github.io/draft-tls-cid/#rfc.section.1):
> > 1. Server deci
On 15 November 2016 at 18:11, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote:
>> I'm not seeing quite enough information here to implement this. How
>> does a server know which of the many HOTP keys it has are in use?
>> Surely you can't use the same HOTP key with every client.
>
> Not sure I understand the quest
On 15/11/2016 09:20, "TLS on behalf of Martin Thomson"
wrote:
>This means that you can guarantee privacy, but it forces
>the server to do an exhaustive search of all of its active connections
>(that is, O(N)) when it gets a 5-tuple mismatch.
I don't think I follow. You'd use CID as primary key t
Okay, so you are saying that every packet has the same number?
On 15 Nov 2016 6:30 PM, "Fossati, Thomas (Nokia - GB)" <
thomas.foss...@nokia.com> wrote:
> On 15/11/2016 09:20, "TLS on behalf of Martin Thomson"
> wrote:
> >This means that you can guarantee privacy, but it forces
> >the server to
Sort of. Client uses one HOTP value from the sequence at a time, until it sees
fit — for example, until it's on the same network attachment.
When attachment changes (and its transport identifiers with it), before sending
a new packet, it picks the next HOTP and sticks it in the record.
When Ser
On Monday, 31 October 2016 20:19:15 CET Dave Garrett wrote:
> On Monday, October 31, 2016 08:05:59 pm Matt Caswell wrote:
> > On 31/10/16 23:53, Dave Garrett wrote:
> > >> I came up with some alternative wording that I think captures the
> > >> discussion:
> > >>
> > >> https://github.com/tlswg/tl
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 05:02:24PM +0900, Yoav Nir wrote:
> I think the performance enhancement (in terms of handshakes per second)
> that you get by reusing ephemeral keys is so great, that we have to
> assume people will do it. You don’t have to keep the keys indefinitely.
> It’s fine to generat
Note that Russ pointed out during the meeting that even though we can use this
process a new RFC # will be minted at the end of the process.
spt
> On Nov 14, 2016, at 10:36, Sean Turner wrote:
>
> This email addresses the "Uplifting” bullet on slide 6 of the chair slides
> (https://www.ietf.o
Hi, all
As mentioned in Tuesday's session, Ed448 and Ed25519ctx add a new parameter to
the signature function: a context string. Setting this string to a different
value for each application (where application could be "PKIX", "TLS", "IKE")
leads to different results and thus a signature made i
Ø I'd be interested in an analysis of the potential privacy
impacts of this. Isn't this more or less the same as doing
SPUD-for-DTLS? (If not, sorry for dragging in controversy:-)
I don’t know SPUD but I see this work providing the same functionality as the
Security Parameter Index (SPI) in the
On 16/11/16 01:59, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
> Ø I'd be interested in an analysis of the potential privacy
> impacts of this. Isn't this more or less the same as doing
> SPUD-for-DTLS? (If not, sorry for dragging in controversy:-)
>
> I don’t know SPUD but I see this work providing the same func
On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 18:20 +0900, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 15 November 2016 at 18:11, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos m> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I'm not seeing quite enough information here to implement
> > > this. How
> > > does a server know which of the many HOTP keys it has are in use?
> > > Sure
15 matches
Mail list logo
