Re: Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-httpbis-encryption-encoding-08

On 6 April 2017 at 06:47, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> wrote:
>
> My only concern is that the document suggests it would be ok to use a
> counter to provide a unique salt value
> for each message. I suspect that provides the kind of information leak
> the draft discusses avoiding.

Hi Robert, can you explain what sort of leakage you are concerned
about?  I mean, I can understand how you could construct the sequence
of resources that were encrypted using a counter for the salt, but I
don't know what that might imply.

That said, I think that the counter thing can be removed.  We require
128 bits of salt, which is a space that is large enough to select
randomly from in perpetuity.

Received on Wednesday, 5 April 2017 22:33:14 UTC