Yes, encrypted SNI was discussed and ultimately rejected. But do we really have to send the literal value? Don't we need to just make sure that the client and server agree on the host that the client wants to connect?
Couldn't we "encrypt" the SNI by hashing the host name with a salt, sending the salt and the resulting hash, making the server calculate the same hash with each of the virtual host names it supports and comparing with the client provided value? (apologies if that was already proposed and rejected) -- 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
