[TLS] Re: RNG state should not cascade across TLS connection s
Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> Mon, 13 Jul 2026 17:54:16 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.tls |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
John Mattsson <[email protected]> writes: >>Redirecting to talk about entropy is unhelpful. > > I don't think I mentioned entropy, but entropy is very useful. As > noted, m = H(m, independent entropy), where the entropy comes from any > source other than the attacker-controlled RNG, thwarts a much larger > class of attacks than m = H(m). > > I don't think it is helpful to focus on Dual_EC_DRBG except as a > historical example. I think the discussion should focus on > attacker-controlled RNGs in general. This is a good point -- and we could design a TLS-specific RNG recommendation that recommends using a per-session randomness source as: rng = SHAKE(OS-rng, session-specific-symmetric-key || full-transcript-of-session) It is easy to dismiss this class of problem by saying "go fix your PRNG" but I believe that is naive and suggest people aren't familiar with the history of compromised RNGs and what kind of attacks they enable. This aspect isn't visible on the wire, so maybe IETF isn't the best place to develop this in. Cryptography isn't the only reasonable method to obtain security: defense-in-depth is another strategy. It is one motivation behind hybrid KEMs, which we fortunately have deployed for good reasons. One way to mitigate this entire class of problems is to do covert channel analysis. If your protocol enables a covert channel, it has a problem. The IETF historically haven't worried a lot about covert channels as a protocol vulnerability, but perhaps it is time to change. I believe TLS has some concerns in this area (e.g., the 32-byte client/server 'random' fields), but ML-KEM increases the attack surface. /Simon _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 1.2 KB)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQNoBAEWCgMQFiEEo8ychwudMQq61M8vUXIrCP5HRaIFAmpVCigUHHNpbW9uQGpv c2Vmc3Nvbi5vcmfCHCYAmDMEXJLOtBYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdACIcrZIvhrxDBkK9f V+QlTmXxo2naObDuGtw58YaxlOu0JVNpbW9uIEpvc2Vmc3NvbiA8c2ltb25Aam9z ZWZzc29uLm9yZz6IlgQTFggAPgIbAwULCQgHAgYVCAkKCwIEFgIDAQIeAQIXgBYh BLHSvRN1vst4TPT4xNc89jjFPAa+BQJp4fWRBQkOa+rdAAoJENc89jjFPAa+hWIA /1lQvrJeGlQq50lP6tm99D1zDy7J1tQ3ha4x0Jx7rkFTAP9hpUKuTvm6m1fXyiZV YZlu2+Id/Dq3CIAZvNF+XEr2BLgzBFySz4EWCSsGAQQB2kcPAQEHQOxTCIOaeXAx I2hIX4HK9bQTpNVei708oNr1Klm8qCGKiPUEGBYIACYCGwIWIQSx0r0Tdb7LeEz0 +MTXPPY4xTwGvgUCaeCW1wUJDmqLVgCBdiAEGRYIAB0WIQSjzJyHC50xCrrUzy9R cisI/kdFogUCXJLPgQAKCRBRcisI/kdFoqdMAQCgH45aseZgIrwKOvUOA9QfsmeE 8GZHYNuFHmM9FEQS6AD6A4x5aYvoY6lo98pgtw2HPDhmcCXFItjXCrV4A0GmJA4J ENc89jjFPAa+s7AA+gIIHpBApDpcDj1sKhzDngmpvwQf0VkHme6s+EG7qSgpAQDe /XMrU0c0Pa3ji85cMqZhvzJOFI/soe662lzL0QY3Bbg4BFySz2oSCisGAQQBl1UB BQEBB0AxlRumDW6nZY7A+VCfek9VpEx6PJmdJyYPt3lNHMd6HAMBCAeIfgQYFggA JgIbDBYhBLHSvRN1vst4TPT4xNc89jjFPAa+BQJp4JbXBQkOaottAAoJENc89jjF PAa+RNUA/2faQO/nFT06E+MlhlQdo/0chlQXC5TZMPTVvVBFwoLOAP9xLJK0ow5E jTzYJB4K810AL/Iv6PEOAEgA4cPTHVlbCQAKCRBRcisI/kdFoo41AP9CsOy6s8Ce 4aK6NQ6QfNs/Tok2Xc/BbeBFdLCfnbVEfgEAz4EiX7cW/qfVfMDCGY4u/S3Rg9ZG keDuJqpkikzNYA8= =rk0y -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----