On Thursday, March 10, 2016 02:41:58 pm Stephen Farrell wrote:
> My question is: Should the WG take the opportunity to more
> tightly define the key exchange parameters for these
> ciphersuites?
> 
> For example, TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 could
> REQUIRE RSA keys with >=2048 bit moduli and one could go
> further and say that this also REQUIRES use of specific
> integer DH groups. Etc etc.

This is a good idea that I think is likely to be impractical and could greatly 
hurt adoption, at least with regard to RSA. Requiring only secure (EC)DHE 
groups, however, I think is probably worth consideration. Both could be dealt 
with in a single TLS stack update, but requiring better certs is still a pain 
for entirely too many (hopefully this won't be true for that much longer).


Dave

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

Reply via email to