On Friday 04 March 2016 10:16:25 Martin Thomson wrote: > If we actually have a volunteer for sni-bis, then that would be OK > with me. > > However, I don't regard the errors as important. Any hope that they > might be used in some automated fashion died a long time ago. Mainly > due to this complete lack of consistency. I assume that the last > error indicates that you didn't get an alert, which I find is > alarmingly common in TLS.
well, if some people don't care about their implementation being fingerprintable, let them be, but there should but at least a recommendation what to do if you want to avoid that. -- Regards, Hubert Kario Senior Quality Engineer, QE BaseOS Security team Web: www.cz.redhat.com Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkyňova 99/71, 612 45, Brno, Czech Republic
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
