TLSv1.2 GCM ciphers

21 views
Skip to first unread message

Wolfgang Breyha

unread,
Jun 6, 2016, 6:27:49 PM6/6/16
to R2Mail2 BETA Test
Hi!

I just joined the beta test, so I'm reporting this for 2.17 since I didn't read about it in the changelog for 2.21 and 2.23...

Can you add the TLSv1.2 GCM ciphers to your list of save ciphers? Top preference to ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256?

Greetings,
Wolfgang Breyha

Stefan Selbitschka

unread,
Jun 14, 2016, 8:40:24 AM6/14/16
to R2Mail2 BETA Test
Hi,

your suggested cipher is already in the list of "NOT weak" ciphers. But this doesn't mean that the underlying system support it.

The following ciphers are considered as NOT weak:

TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA
TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256
TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256
TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA
TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384
TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA
TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256
TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256
TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA
TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256
TLS_DHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
TLS_DHE_DSS_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA
TLS_DHE_DSS_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256
TLS_DHE_DSS_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256
TLS_DHE_DSS_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA
TLS_DHE_DSS_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA256
TLS_DHE_DSS_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA
TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256
TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256
TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA
TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA256
TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384

regards
stefan

Wolfgang Breyha

unread,
Jun 16, 2016, 5:17:56 AM6/16/16
to R2Mail2 BETA Test
Hi!

You are right. I checked it on CM11 assuming a KK release should support those ciphers since my old ICS did as well.

Now on my new 5.1.1 phone GCM is used as expected. Thanks!

Greetings, Wolfgang
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages