Hi,  

Is it possible for the standards/RFCs to dictate de-prioritization of certain 
troublesome TLS processing patterns?

The RFCs 
-- may suggest identification of such patterns,
-- may suggest implementation of certain low priority processing 
queues/threads/executions.

Following is an example troublesome pattern which may or may not be coming from 
attackers:

Please consider a scenario wherein a server is allowing the clients to upload 
big files.

The client is mostly doing the transmission in this case.

The client can have a rogue TLS implementation with the following intentional 
changes:
0. Choose CBC with AES256-SHA56 or any other heavier (in terms of processing 
power requirements) and non paralleliz'able  cipher suite. 
1. After the handshake, always send all the TLS records (Application Data) 
plain text fragment size which is no greater than 1 Byte.
2. Always send a padding of max possible or big size (eg 256 Bytes)

So the TLS record will look like: (1.2 version)

5 B Hdr + 16 B IV + 1B Cipher Text + 32 B HMAC + 255 B Padding.= 309 Bytes 
including the tls header.

Additionally the client's network stack can have some changes which may 
possibly cause the following too:
A. TCP segmentation 
B. IP Fragmentation

Now the server will have to 
i. do ip reassmebly/ TCP reassembly to recover every single TLS record
ii. The TLS record thus recovered will undergo decryption/HMAC verification 
only to obtain 1 Byte of plaintext application payload.

If many such rogue clients sending huge files to the server, the server will 
end up denying services to the genuine clients.

Now A and B above are not related to TLS, but the other points do have 
something to do with the implementations.

If the server's TLS implantation can recognize this pattern [possibly from an 
attacker], it can give low priority to such requests so that other genuine 
requests 
may get served without being affected.

If such preventive measures are a part of the RFCs, the implementations will be 
less vulnerable.

Thanks
Jitendra
 


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

Reply via email to