On Wednesday, 20 July 2016 13:57:36 CEST Ilari Liusvaara wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 11:20:46AM +0200, Hubert Kario wrote:
> > So I have partial results after scanning around 14 000 domains.
> > The scanner was able to connect to 12 606 hosts that presented unexpired
> > certificates signed by CA's in Mozilla root program.
> > 
> > Of those:
> > 93% support TLSv1.2 protocol (11807)
> > a single one is intolerant to TLSv1.2 Client Hello
> > 3.7% (469) are intolerant to TLSv1.3 Client Hello
> > 4.4% (556) are intolerant to TLSv1.4 Client Hello
> > 
> > (by intolerant, I mean, I was not able to connect to them with any hello
> > message that looked like an IE, Chrome or Firefox Client Hello with just
> > version changed or additionally some or all extensions removed)
> > 
> > at the same time, 15.5% (1965) are intolerant to an "Xmas tree" Client
> > Hello (one that includes many ciphers, few TLSv1.3 key shares, etc.
> > bringing its size to something like 2800 bytes)
> 
> Wonder how big part of the difference is due to steps (eg. 1024 and
> 2048 bytes) in between and how much is due to the extra extensions or
> cihpers.
> 
> > 49% (6240) are intolerant to a Client Hello with no extensions but
> > big number of ciphers that bring its size to 16388 bytes)
> > 91.5% (11539) are intolerant to a Client Hello with no extensions
> > but a number of ciphers that bring it well above single record layer limit
> > (16.5KiB)
> 
> Wonder how much of that is again size thresholds (in Ciphersuites and
> in total ClientHello size) and how much is fragmenting the Client
> Hello to multiple fragments...

yes, that's something I'd like to figure out too, but I was thinking of
using a bisect approach to do it, so it will be more complex to do =>
I won't do this for this month's scan

patches welcome, though :)

-- 
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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

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

Reply via email to