Subject: Re: [dns-privacy] Correction to my mike statement about the provisioning draft

From: "Konda, Tirumaleswar Reddy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2019 10:10:45 +0000

Hi Watson,

Please see inline

From: dns-privacy <[email-masked]> On Behalf Of Watson Ladd
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2019 11:56 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [dns-privacy] Correction to my mike statement about the provisioning draft

CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

________________________________
Despite citations to SRP-6 the rfc 5054 implements 6a which doesn't have a 2 for 1 attack.

[TR] Yes.

It does however use SHA1 hardcoded. Probably not a good idea.

[TR] SHA1 is hardcoded, but don’t see any other TLS specification using PAKE scheme other than the expired draft https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-barnes-tls-pake-04.  Is there any other PAKE scheme to use in TLS ?

We seem to have thought there were other draft issues as well though.

[TR] I will work on the comments received from the WG, and post an updated draft.

Cheers,
-Tiru

Sincerely,
Watson Ladd