Issues
--
* tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni (+1/-0/💬0)
1 issues created:
- Mention that the server identity may be revealed by ServerHellp (by emanjon)
https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-esni/issues/612
* tlswg/tls-flags (+1/-3/💬1)
1 issues created:
- Refer to I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446b
Please see RFC 1700, the section on data notation. The most significant
bit in a byte /octet or word is always bit 0. A collection of bytes
representing a set of bits should number from 0 or 0x80 hex as a mask for
the first byte.
While 1700 was obsoleted by the protocol registries, I believe thi
Paul,
You can go ahead and mark this one as Verified. The name of the 0 value is
“X509”.
spt
> On Mar 7, 2020, at 13:08, RFC Errata System wrote:
>
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8447,
> "IANA Registry Updates for TLS and DTLS".
>
> -
The following errata report has been held for document update
for RFC7905, "ChaCha20-Poly1305 Cipher Suites for Transport Layer Security
(TLS)".
--
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5251
The following errata report has been rejected for RFC5246,
"The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2".
--
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5036
--
Status: Rejected
Ty
Hi! This has been lingering for a while, I tend to think we could mark it as
HFDU (hold for document update).
spt
> On Feb 28, 2019, at 16:20, RFC Errata System
> wrote:
>
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8448,
> "Example Handshake Traces for TLS 1.3".
>
>
Paul,
I think you can mark this one as verified. I don’t think anybody is really
confused by not citing 2446 in the 1st sentence but the quoted sentence is in
RFC 2446 so as suggested the sentence is still true.
spt
> On Oct 19, 2018, at 23:33, RFC Errata System
> wrote:
>
> The following
I suspect that this errata should be rejected. RFC 6125 was published months
after RFC 6066 and that makes this addition feel “new" to me and as such it’s
inappropriate to change through the errata process; see [1].
spt
[1]
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/statement-iesg-iesg-processing-of-rf
Is there value in citing the security analysis for ECH as an informative
reference?
https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3548606.3559360
A Symbolic Analysis of Privacy for TLS 1.3 with Encrypted Client Hello |
Proceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications
Security
