This document specifies version 1.3 of the Transport Layer Security
(TLS) protocol. TLS allows client/server applications to communicate
over the Internet in a way that is designed to prevent eavesdropping,
tampering, and message forgery.
Working Group Summary
The document is the work product of the members of the TLS
WG. There is strong consensus in the working group for this
document. The area that was most controversial was around
the inclusion of a 0-RTT mode that has different security
properties than the rest of TLS. s1.3 lists the major differences
from TLS1.2, as agreed by the contributors; we do not think
that the RFC needs to list the changes that occurred between
The draft has had 3 WGLCs to address various issues and the
chairs assessment was fair in each of these discussions. At this
point there are no known outstanding issue.
While I personally do not agree with inclusion of 0-RTT because
there are bound to be successful attacks against the mitigations
in the future, I do agree with the chair's assessment of the WG
consensus and am pleased with the additional text on mitigating
the associated risks with 0-RTT.
There are over 10 interoperable implementations of the
protocol from different sources written in different
languages. The major web browser vendors and TLS
libraries vendors have draft implementations or have
indicated they will support the protocol in the future. In
addition to having extensive review in the TLS working
group, the protocol has received unprecedented security
review by the academic community. Several TRON (TLS
Ready or Not) conferences were held with academic
community to give them a chance to present their
findings for TLS. This has resulted in improvements to
the protocol. There was also much consideration and
discussion around any contentious points, resolved through
polls and working group last calls.
Please note that ID-nits complains about the obsoleted/
updated RFCs not being listed in the abstract. This is
intentional because the abstract is now a concise and
comprehensive overview and is free form citations, as
The Document Shepherd is Sean Turner.
The responsible AD is Kathleen Moriarty.
The IANA Expert(s) for the registries
in this document are
Yoav Nir <email@example.com>,
Rich Salz <firstname.lastname@example.org>, and
Nick Sullivan <email@example.com> .
This document requests the creation of the TLS SignatureScheme
Registry with values assigned via Specification Required [RFC8126].
This document requests the reference for several registries be
updated to point to this document. The registries include:
- TLS Cipher Suite Registry, updated via via Specification Required [RFC8126]
- TLS ContentType Registry, future values allocated via Standards Action [RFC8126]
- TLS Alert Registry, future values allocated via Standards Action [RFC8126]
- TLS HandshakeType Registry, future values allocated via Standards Action [RFC8126]
- TLS ExtensionType Registry, the policy is changed in ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates and this will be reflected in version 25 of the draft
RFC Editor Note
RFC Editor Note
Please ensure a reference is added prior to final publication for the
text added in section
E.6. PSK Identity Exposure