Bas Westerbaan wrote:
>BoringSSL (Chrome) generates a new keypair for each connection. We do
>too. ML-KEM keygen is quite cheap anyway.

That is great to hear! 👍

Hopefully most implementations follow this. Reusing ephemeral keys are bad for 
several reasons. It relates the key material in different connections that 
should not be related. A vulnerability (theoretical, bad implementation like no 
public-key validation, or side channel) can enable an attacker to listen in to 
a someone's else connections. Reuse also have significant privacy issues as you 
suddenly have a fixed cleartext field which is the same in several connections.

NIST has very good requirements on this "An ephemeral private key shall be used 
in exactly one key-establishment transaction". Reusing an ephemeral key is not 
FIPS compliant.
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/nist.sp.800-56Ar3.pdf

I hope that the CNSA 2.0 Profile for TLS 1.3 will forbid this just like the 
CNSA 1.0 profile did for IPsec. 3GPP had a lot of help form the CNSA 1.0 
profiles.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9206/

I also hope a future update of TLS will forbid reuse.

Cheers,
John

From: Bas Westerbaan <bas=40cloudflare....@dmarc.ietf.org>
Date: Friday, 1 November 2024 at 13:33
To: Salz, Rich <rsalz=40akamai....@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: tls@ietf.org <tls@ietf.org>
Subject: [TLS] Re: MLKEM or Khyber KX
BoringSSL (Chrome) generates a new keypair for each connection. We do too. 
ML-KEM keygen is quite cheap anyway.

On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 1:11 PM Salz, Rich 
<rsalz=40akamai....@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:40akamai....@dmarc.ietf.org>> wrote:
Are folks generating a new key every connection or just using a longer-lived 
keypair and not re-using the random?
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org<mailto:tls@ietf.org>
To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org<mailto:tls-le...@ietf.org>
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org

Reply via email to