Subject: Re: [TLS] comment on draft-ietf-tls-pwd-06

From: Aaron Zauner <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 00:52:45 +0200

Hi Peter,

Peter Gutmann wrote:
> 
> Given that AES-CBC with EtM is a lot less vulnerable to problems than AES-GCM
> (and arguably even without EtM it's a lot less brittle than GCM is), why would
> you remove it?  It's a much more robust mode than GCM.
> 

You're right. I wrongly assumed that your ETM document is still in draft
phase, I see that it's been accepted.

Thanks,
Aaron