Subject: [ietf-tls] Re security considerations for draft-tuexen-tsvwg-tls-over-sctp-00.txt...

From: John Border <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:45:24 -0400

Just curious...  (I don't know the answer.)  Does the use of abbreviated
handshakes for additional SCTP streams (as described in Section 5.2 of the
document) introduce any security considerations which need to be captured in
Section 6?  I didn't see any discussion of any issues related to the use of
abbreviated handshakes in RFC 2246 (but I am enough of a security novice that
it may be there and I just didn't recognize it)...

John

---
You are currently subscribed to ietf-tls as: [email-masked]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email-masked]

---

From: Eric Rescorla <[email-masked]>
Date: 23 Jul 2001 08:36:34 -0700

> it may be there and I just didn't recognize it)...
The use of the term "abbreviated" in this draft is a bug. The correct
term is "resumed". There are no real security issues here. They
simply need to be treated as if they had the same security properties
as the original handshake.

-Ekr

---