Sorry, the hybrid TLS draft I referenced should have been 
draft-tls-westerbaan-xyber768d00.  I do realise they are different drafts with 
slightly different KEMs, I just can't copy and paste properly!

Peter

From: TLS <tls-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Peter C
Sent: Monday, November 6, 2023 4:08 PM
To: tls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [TLS] Updated AuthKEM drafts

Thom,

If I'm understanding things correctly, the proof of multi-stage security for 
AuthKEM requires that the KEM used for authentication is IND-CCA2 secure.

Unfortunately, kem_x25519kyber768 from draft-westerbaan-cfrg-hpke-xyber768d00 
is not IND-CCA2 secure.  It simply concatenates the shared secrets so is 
straightforward to distinguish given a decapsulation oracle - modify the first 
component ciphertext and check whether the second half of the concatenated 
shared secret stays the same.  It's possible that the TLS key schedule means it 
might still be fine to use, maybe - this is the argument in 
draft-westerbaan-cfrg-hpke-xyber768d00 for the ephemeral KEM - but I don't 
think this is covered by the existing KEMTLS security analysis and it's not 
clear to me what happens if one of the component algorithms is broken.

An alternative would be to use a hybrid KEM construction along the lines of 
draft-ounsworth-cfrg-kem-combiners where you are guaranteed to get IND-CCA2 
security.  I realise this moves away from directly reusing the ephemeral KEM 
for authentication, but they have slightly different security requirements and 
it's somewhat analogous to using dhkem_x25519_sha256 for authentication instead 
of x25519 by itself.

Best,

Peter

From: TLS <tls-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Thom Wiggers
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 10:41 AM
To: <tls@ietf.org> <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: [TLS] Updated AuthKEM drafts

Hi all,

I have just updated the AuthKEM draft and published a new one. TL;DR:

AuthKEM is a proposal that replaces signature-based handshake authentication in 
TLS by an additional KEM key exchange (putting KEM public keys in endpoint 
certificates).

In this update we:
* Split off the AuthKEM cached/pre-shared KEM public key PSK-style mechanism 
into a separate draft
* Added a new section that explains the sizes of different TLS and AuthKEM 
handshakes
* Also explain how AuthKEM makes it cheaper to use Falcon for offline signatures
* Expanded on related work and how this mechanism relates to compression 
proposals

In our view, AuthKEM can be especially helpful for embedded and IoT devices, as 
using KEMs instead of signatures can be much cheaper in terms of bandwidth, 
computation, and (when mutually authenticating) code size. For example, in 
[Samandari23], a KEM-authentication approach was investigated for MQTT and 
resulted in much faster messaging. But also for the WebPKI, AuthKEM can reduce 
handshake sizes further when combined with e.g. Merkle Tree Certs or Abridged 
Certificate Compression.

The KEM-based PSK-style mechanism can in my mind be a robust contribution to 
the discussion on the update for RFC7924 versus session tickets: storing KEM 
public keys can be much easier than symmetric session tickets or other 
symmetric secrets in terms of key management, but also in terms of not having 
to protect the secrets.

The source repository for both drafts lives at 
https://github.com/kemtls/draft-celi-wiggers-tls-authkem. I am already aware 
that I forgot to update the abstract for authkem-psk, so that is one of the new 
issues tracked there.

There are lots of things still open for discussion, and these are marked in the 
draft. I am also sure the presentation or any details can be much improved, and 
welcome any and all contributions to either.

Cheers,

Also on behalf of my co-authors,

Thom
PQShield

[Samandari23] https://www.mdpi.com/2624-800X/3/3/21/html
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

Reply via email to