2% is actually pretty good, but I agree that we're going to need fallback.

I'd be fine with moving the 8 bytes to the end, but I wonder if it would be
better to
instead have the *client* indicate its max version and the server check.
That would
have the advantage that it would leave more of the server random intact.

-Ekr

P.S. The FALLBACK_SCSV isn't a substitute because it isn't signed by the
server.


On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 3:29 PM, David Benjamin <david...@chromium.org>
wrote:

> In case folks hoped we could bump the ClientHello version without those
> dreaded browser fallbacks, I have bad news. :-( 1.3 intolerance very much
> exists. (Maybe we should just give up on ClientHello.version and use an
> extension? Extensions have rusted less.)
>
> I picked a large list of top sites and tried connecting to them. Just
> under 2% of them could handle a TLS 1.2 ClientHello, but not the same
> ClientHello with the version switched to 1.3 (no other changes, so I
> haven't tested a real 1.3 ClientHello). They're not unknown hosts either. I
> expect if you probe any top site list, you'll very quickly find some.
>
> Fortunately, the ServerHello.random trick fixes this. But it currently
> clobbers the old server timestamp which tlsdate[1] uses for clock
> synchronization. There really should be a less silly secure timestamping
> protocol, but, today, tlsdate has users. Any servers which expect to be a
> tlsdate target can't honor this MUST without tlsdate gone.
>
> (FALLBACK_SCSV works fine as well, but I gather people prefer the
> ServerHello.random one and would be unhappy having to implement both in
> clients with a fallback because not all servers do the latter.)
>
> I mentioned this before, but rather than clobbering the first 8 bytes, the
> last 8 bytes seems as reasonable and avoids this unnecessary complication
> to TLS 1.3 deployment. If folks agree now that the fallback's
> resurrection is more certain, I'm happy to put together a PR.
>
> David
>
> [1] https://github.com/ioerror/tlsdate
>
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
>
>
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

Reply via email to