Subject: [TLS] Does TLS support ECDHE based SEED cipher suites?

From: M K Saravanan <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2021 15:56:02 +0800

Hi,

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4162#section-3.3 says the
following SEED cipher suites are supported for TLS:

==========

      CipherSuite TLS_RSA_WITH_SEED_CBC_SHA      = { 0x00, 0x96};
      CipherSuite TLS_DH_DSS_WITH_SEED_CBC_SHA   = { 0x00, 0x97};
      CipherSuite TLS_DH_RSA_WITH_SEED_CBC_SHA   = { 0x00, 0x98};
      CipherSuite TLS_DHE_DSS_WITH_SEED_CBC_SHA  = { 0x00, 0x99};
      CipherSuite TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_SEED_CBC_SHA  = { 0x00, 0x9A};
      CipherSuite TLS_DH_anon_WITH_SEED_CBC_SHA  = { 0x00, 0x9B};
============
Does anyone know whether any ECDHE based cipher suites were added for
SEED for TLS?

with regards,
Saravanan

---

From: Ilari Liusvaara <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2021 10:56:45 +0200

> Does anyone know whether any ECDHE based cipher suites were added for

No, those have not been added. The actual registry is at:

https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-parameters/tls-parameters.txt

There are no cipher suites with both ECDHE and SEED (or cipher suite
for SEED in TLS 1.3). My guess is that this is because SEED has
essentially been obsoleted by ARIA.

For ARIA, one can find TLS 1.2 chipersuites with ECDHE and AEAD.
Altough there are no cipher suites for TLS 1.3, so ARIA can not be used
in TLS 1.3 either.

-Ilari

---

From: Hanno Böck <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2021 10:22:04 +0100

On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 15:56:02 +0800

> Does anyone know whether any ECDHE based cipher suites were added for

I don't know what the background for this request is, but I'd like to
point out that we had similar discussions in the past about obscure
ciphers (look for brainpool curves) in the past.

This is my personal opinion, but I think it is widely shared among many
in the community:
It used to be that the TLS community valued supporting as many ciphers
as possible. But this has more or less ended with TLS 1.3, which is
part of a larger realization in IT security that unnecessary complexity
is usually bad and should be avoided.
Instead the trend is to support a small set of algorithms that are
generally considered "okay-ish" (there are always minor ups and downs
of certain cipher choices) and leave it with that and not seek to
support a wide variety of algorithms.

I'd oppose any specification of new cipher suites without a good
justification, and I think this is an opinion many here share.

-- 
Hanno Böck
https://hboeck.de/

---

From: "Salz, Rich" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2021 16:58:52 +0000

generally considered "okay-ish" (there are always minor ups and downs
    of certain cipher choices

I think it is an English language issue, but I would phrase this as "generally considered good"  Much better than "okay-ish."

If anyone wants to specify new ciphers, they need to write an internet-draft, or some other published standard, and submit a request to the TLS registry.  It does *not* have to be an RFC.  There are often not-strictly-technical reasons for needing this.

---

From: "tom.ripe" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2021 16:23:54 +0000

> justification, and I think this is an opinion many here share.

And I just see an I-D for AEGIS-128L and AEGIS-256, albeit not for TLS. 
  There seems to be no limit to new algorithms!

Tom Petch

---

From: Kyle Rose <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2021 11:27:31 -0500

>   There seems to be no limit to new algorithms!

IIRC, this was intentional: make it easy to get a code point so people
don't squat on them, but have IANA maintain a list of "recommended"
ciphers, as shown in the catalog here:

https://www.iana.org/assignments/tls-parameters/tls-parameters.xhtml

Kyle

---

From: "Salz, Rich" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2021 16:45:37 +0000

*   IIRC, this was intentional: make it easy to get a code point so people don't squat on them, but have IANA maintain a list of "recommended" ciphers, as shown in the catalog here:

IANA maintains the list, under the direction of the designated experts, but whether or not something is recommended comes from the TLS group, not either of the first two. Which is good, you don’t want recommendations coming from (currently) just three people.

---

From: "tom.ripe" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2021 17:14:01 +0000

> IANA maintains the list, under the direction of the designated experts, but whether or not something is recommended comes from the TLS group, not either of the first two. Which is good, you don’t w…

Is there any way to link from the TLS pages in the datatracker to the 
list of algorithms and their status?

I realise that I can go to IANA home page, select protocols, remember 
how TLS is spelt, fish around a bit and stumble across it but it seems 
like an obvious short cut.

Tom Petch

---

From: "Salz, Rich" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2021 17:18:04 +0000

The WG chairs can add such a link (as an "external URL").  They'll have to do it.  (I can walk someone through the clicking if they need it)