<story><title>TLS 1.3 and Proxies</title><url>https://www.imperialviolet.org/2018/03/10/tls13.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>koliber</author><text>I just read the discussion and I see that people are conflating a few things and having an emotional response. There is a difference between different types of network operators, and whether they have any business snooping on your traffic.&lt;p&gt;There is a difference between an unauthorized party intercepting TLS communication, and a party you have authorized to do so.&lt;p&gt;Let&amp;#x27;s say I am a private person and am trying to access my bank account through a TLS connection. I am connected via WiFi to my cafe. I have not authorized the cafe, its uplink provider, nor any of the other network operators between me and the bank to intercept my traffic. It should be impossible to do so.&lt;p&gt;Let&amp;#x27;s say I am employee of a financial institution. This company, in order to adhere with record-keeping laws, needs to log all network connections. One of the conditions of my employment is that I authorize the company to intercept my network communications. The proxies within my company should be able to intercept my communications. However, no network operator outside of the company for which I work for and to which I have given consent to intercept my traffic, should be able to intercept the communications.&lt;p&gt;The real world presents situations that are more nuanced than &amp;quot;encrypt everything and don&amp;#x27;t let anyone between me and the destination to see what is going on.&amp;quot; There are many places where the above is the desired and sensible requirement. There are also many use cases where crypto is warranted, but select parties should have the ability to break it.&lt;p&gt;How this should happen is to be seen. In the examples I have given above, &amp;quot;consent&amp;quot; will have to come both in the idea of consent, as well as some crypto key that will allow the privileged proxies to intercept my traffic.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>rocqua</author><text>Note that nothing about TLS 1.3 prevents a Proxy whose CA certificate is installed by the user from MitMing a TLS 1.3 session.
This is also why certificate pins are ignored when a cert is signed by a manually installed certificate.&lt;p&gt;What TLS 1.3 does appear to do is make it harder to optimize this proxying, and make it impossible to be selective about what you proxy.
However, both such optimizations and selective proxying are apparently hard to implement securely.
Now, selective proxying is nice to have.
It is better if enterprises don&amp;#x27;t intercept traffic to banks or social networks. However, it seems to me like facebook would be a nice side-channel for exfiltrating data.&lt;p&gt;It seems to me that selective proxying could still be solved at the DNS level. Make any domain except for the whitelisted ones resolve to a proxy, and the have the proxy in between all traffic.
This means you also proxy all unencrypted traffic to the outside world, but if you are proxying TLS, you probably want to block or proxy plaintext outbound connections as well.</text></comment>
<story><title>TLS 1.3 and Proxies</title><url>https://www.imperialviolet.org/2018/03/10/tls13.html</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>koliber</author><text>I just read the discussion and I see that people are conflating a few things and having an emotional response. There is a difference between different types of network operators, and whether they have any business snooping on your traffic.&lt;p&gt;There is a difference between an unauthorized party intercepting TLS communication, and a party you have authorized to do so.&lt;p&gt;Let&amp;#x27;s say I am a private person and am trying to access my bank account through a TLS connection. I am connected via WiFi to my cafe. I have not authorized the cafe, its uplink provider, nor any of the other network operators between me and the bank to intercept my traffic. It should be impossible to do so.&lt;p&gt;Let&amp;#x27;s say I am employee of a financial institution. This company, in order to adhere with record-keeping laws, needs to log all network connections. One of the conditions of my employment is that I authorize the company to intercept my network communications. The proxies within my company should be able to intercept my communications. However, no network operator outside of the company for which I work for and to which I have given consent to intercept my traffic, should be able to intercept the communications.&lt;p&gt;The real world presents situations that are more nuanced than &amp;quot;encrypt everything and don&amp;#x27;t let anyone between me and the destination to see what is going on.&amp;quot; There are many places where the above is the desired and sensible requirement. There are also many use cases where crypto is warranted, but select parties should have the ability to break it.&lt;p&gt;How this should happen is to be seen. In the examples I have given above, &amp;quot;consent&amp;quot; will have to come both in the idea of consent, as well as some crypto key that will allow the privileged proxies to intercept my traffic.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>pavs</author><text>In some countries, there are &amp;quot;secret laws&amp;quot; (not the USA), where government body that controls ISP license and legalese issues can force ISPs to keep logs, not just metadata, of individual user browsing and share it with law enforcement official - whenever asked without any form of a court order and legal paper. We already have to share the &amp;#x27;User Form&amp;#x27; the users sign up when getting internet connections, which has all kinds of personal information including pictures, address, phone number and national ID number.&lt;p&gt;Failure to do so will get you heavily fined and get your license revoked to do business. Also, you can&amp;#x27;t talk about it to the public.&lt;p&gt;I have friends and family in at least three countries who are involved in this industry and have confirmed me that this is a routine process, log sharing, port-mirroring, putting black-boxes in the middle of your core network is just routine work and has been the case for many years.</text></comment>