[cryptography] Repeated Encryptions Considered.... ?

Nico Williams nico at cryptonector.com
Sun Jun 19 18:20:37 EDT 2011

On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Steven Bellovin <smb at cs.columbia.edu> wrote:
> On Jun 19, 2011, at 5:36 05PM, Marsh Ray wrote:
>> Now I've heard everything. Javascript crypto proponents using it as an argument against SSL. Tell them that they should use SSL properly and consider that an argument against Javascript crypto instead. And hold on to your wallet.
> They solve different problems, at least if used correctly.  SSL secures
> the channel; Javascript secures (or can secure) the transmitted object itself.

Channel binding helps, if you can trust the end-points of the channel
after you've established that there's no MITM.  If you don't trust the
end-points of the channel even when you've shown there's no MITM then
there's no point using the channel at all, and all crypto has to be
done at a higher layer.

Channel binding allows you to do authentication at a higher layer,
where you have the correct context, and bind to lower layer channels,
which is where we've invested the most in hardware acceleration.


More information about the cryptography mailing list