[TLS] Re: Algorithm agility (Re: Re: WG Last Call: d raft-ietf-tls-mlkem-08 (Ends 2026-07-08))

Nico Williams <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.tls
Message-ID <ak1rtUm/IweghGiJ@ubby>
On Tue, Jul 07, 2026 at 03:29:11PM -0400, Soatok Dreamseeker wrote:
> Respectfully, when we're talking about "negotiation", I mean any situation
> where anyone ever decides to use Algorithm A instead of Algorithm B in any
> conceptual way. That definition is too broad to be useful.

Generally that's going to involve negotiation somewhere.

> I mean something much more specific: a runtime decision about which
> algorithm to use. In JWT's case, this decision is determined entirely by an
> in-band signal, which was not very well thought out. See: RSA-to-HMAC JWT
> algorithm confusion attacks, or alg=none.
> https://www.howmanydayssinceajwtalgnonevuln.com/

I don't know what you're arguing.  If your argument is "don't get this
wrong", then I agree 100%.  If your argument harkens back to what I was
originally responding to, namely that algorithm agility is bad, then I
disagree 100%.

Nico
-- 

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.