4 ms·
This paper is misleading IMO. The abstract says - "On the positive side, we prove that TLS 1.3 protects the privacy of its users at least against passive advers
by colmmacc 7y ago
This paper is misleading IMO. The abstract says - "On the positive side, we prove that TLS 1.3 protects the privacy of its users at least against passive adversaries, contrary to TLS 1.2, and against more powerful ones."
But if you read the summary, it also says "both TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 session resumption present serious privacy flaws despite not using concrete authentication elements, such as certificates ... While [PSK-DHE] provides a measure of backward security, it does nothing to improve privacy."
TLS1.3 is awesome, but it's still a layer 4 transport scheme, and there are plenty of ways that a passive adversary can derive privacy sensitive information. I mean it's /trivial/ for a passive adversary to tell that you're visiting an embarrassing website ... to pick just one obvious example.
- nickserv 7y agoRight, and it's in the name, after all: Transport Layer Security. Security is not quite the same as privacy. TLS was never meant as a way of guaranteeing privacy in a broad sense as far as I know, and this is the first time I'm seeing it described as such. Now, one may argue that security is a needed component of privacy, but it's certainly not enough by itself.