Revisions to Security over multi-streaming such as SCTP

replaced http://security.stackexchange.com/ with https://security.stackexchange.com/

edited Mar 17, 2017 at 10:46

1

I refer to multi-streaming as the ability to send two or more streams of some unit of data (block, byte streams) in one established association/context. SCTP is an example and the protocol I was thinking about when this question came to mind. How could I efficiently secure data sent over multiple streams?

What I see in many documents is something equivalent to N handshakes have to be performed for N streams. This seems to be suggesting each stream is independently secured. A counter example would be to add multi-stream-over-one-stream to TLS instead of naked TCP. But that would not include independent loss/order recovery.

What I was wondering about is making security more efficient over multi-streaming (like SCTP) by first securing one stream then using that stream to secure more streams without the full handshake. If stream 0 is already secure and a sender wants to start sending some data over stream 1, my idea is to generate a random key and send it over stream 0 with info that it is for securing stream 1. But is this safe even when stream 0 is already secure?

I was thinking of using SCTP (for other reasons) and do security management over stream 0 and data over streams 1 and up. EDIT: The idea is to speed up starting to send data by the sender generating a key for a new stream X (X > 0) and sending that key over stream 0 and then sending encrypted data over stream X.

This question is the inverse of Has networking using multiple “unrelated” connections to share an encrypted data stream been researched?Has networking using multiple “unrelated” connections to share an encrypted data stream been researched? The streams I want to secure are related by being part of the same association with no intent to bond them (they would stay independent).

I refer to multi-streaming as the ability to send two or more streams of some unit of data (block, byte streams) in one established association/context. SCTP is an example and the protocol I was thinking about when this question came to mind. How could I efficiently secure data sent over multiple streams?

What I see in many documents is something equivalent to N handshakes have to be performed for N streams. This seems to be suggesting each stream is independently secured. A counter example would be to add multi-stream-over-one-stream to TLS instead of naked TCP. But that would not include independent loss/order recovery.

What I was wondering about is making security more efficient over multi-streaming (like SCTP) by first securing one stream then using that stream to secure more streams without the full handshake. If stream 0 is already secure and a sender wants to start sending some data over stream 1, my idea is to generate a random key and send it over stream 0 with info that it is for securing stream 1. But is this safe even when stream 0 is already secure?

I was thinking of using SCTP (for other reasons) and do security management over stream 0 and data over streams 1 and up. EDIT: The idea is to speed up starting to send data by the sender generating a key for a new stream X (X > 0) and sending that key over stream 0 and then sending encrypted data over stream X.

This question is the inverse of Has networking using multiple “unrelated” connections to share an encrypted data stream been researched? The streams I want to secure are related by being part of the same association with no intent to bond them (they would stay independent).

I refer to multi-streaming as the ability to send two or more streams of some unit of data (block, byte streams) in one established association/context. SCTP is an example and the protocol I was thinking about when this question came to mind. How could I efficiently secure data sent over multiple streams?

What I see in many documents is something equivalent to N handshakes have to be performed for N streams. This seems to be suggesting each stream is independently secured. A counter example would be to add multi-stream-over-one-stream to TLS instead of naked TCP. But that would not include independent loss/order recovery.

What I was wondering about is making security more efficient over multi-streaming (like SCTP) by first securing one stream then using that stream to secure more streams without the full handshake. If stream 0 is already secure and a sender wants to start sending some data over stream 1, my idea is to generate a random key and send it over stream 0 with info that it is for securing stream 1. But is this safe even when stream 0 is already secure?

I was thinking of using SCTP (for other reasons) and do security management over stream 0 and data over streams 1 and up. EDIT: The idea is to speed up starting to send data by the sender generating a key for a new stream X (X > 0) and sending that key over stream 0 and then sending encrypted data over stream X.

This question is the inverse of Has networking using multiple “unrelated” connections to share an encrypted data stream been researched? The streams I want to secure are related by being part of the same association with no intent to bond them (they would stay independent).

Notice removed Draw attention by Skaperen

occurred Jun 6, 2015 at 10:59

Bounty Ended with StackzOfZtuff's answer chosen by Skaperen

occurred Jun 6, 2015 at 10:59

+more copy edit, +tag "sctp"

Source Link

edited Jun 5, 2015 at 13:19

StackzOfZtuff

18.3k
1
55
86

I refer to multi-streaming as the ability to send 2two or more streams of some unit of data (block, byte streams) in one established association/context. SCTP is an example and the protocol I was thinking about when this question came to mind. How could I efficiently secure data sent over multiple streams?

What I see in many documents is something equivalent to N handshakes have to be performed for N streams. This seems to be suggesting each stream is independently secured. A counter example would be to add multi-stream-over-one-stream to TLS instead of naked TCP. But that would not include independent loss/order recovery.

What I was wondering about is making security more efficient over multi-streaming (like SCTP) by first securing one stream then using that stream to secure more streams without the full handshake. If stream 0 is already secure and a sender wants to start sending some data over stream 1, my idea is to generate a random key and send it over stream 0 with info that it is for securing stream 1. But is this safe even when stream 0 is already secure?

I was thinking of using SCTP (for other reasons) and do security management over stream 0 and data over steamsstreams 1 and up. EDIT: The idea is to speed up starting to send data by the sender generating a key for a new stream X (X > 0) and sending it and Xthat key over stream 0 and then sending encrypted data over stream X.

This question is the inverse of Has networking using multiple “unrelated” connections to share an encrypted data stream been researched? the The streams I want to secure are related by being part of the same association with no intent to bond them (they would stay independent).

I refer to multi-streaming as the ability to send 2 or more streams of some unit of data (block, byte streams) in one established association/context. SCTP is an example and the protocol I was thinking about when this question came to mind. How could I efficiently secure data sent over multiple streams?

What I see in many documents is something equivalent to N handshakes have to be performed for N streams. This seems to be suggesting each stream is independently secured. A counter example would be to add multi-stream-over-one-stream to TLS instead of naked TCP. But that would not include independent loss/order recovery.

What I was wondering about is making security more efficient over multi-streaming (like SCTP) by first securing one stream then using that stream to secure more streams without the full handshake. If stream 0 is already secure and a sender wants to start sending some data over stream 1, my idea is to generate a random key and send it over stream 0 with info that it is for securing stream 1. But is this safe even when stream 0 is already secure?

I was thinking of using SCTP (for other reasons) and do security management over stream 0 and data over steams 1 and up. EDIT: The idea is to speed up starting to send data by the sender generating a key for new stream X (X > 0) and sending it and X over stream 0 and then sending encrypted data over stream X.

This question is the inverse of Has networking using multiple “unrelated” connections to share an encrypted data stream been researched? the streams I want to secure are related by being part of the same association with no intent to bond them (they would stay independent).

I refer to multi-streaming as the ability to send two or more streams of some unit of data (block, byte streams) in one established association/context. SCTP is an example and the protocol I was thinking about when this question came to mind. How could I efficiently secure data sent over multiple streams?

What I see in many documents is something equivalent to N handshakes have to be performed for N streams. This seems to be suggesting each stream is independently secured. A counter example would be to add multi-stream-over-one-stream to TLS instead of naked TCP. But that would not include independent loss/order recovery.

What I was wondering about is making security more efficient over multi-streaming (like SCTP) by first securing one stream then using that stream to secure more streams without the full handshake. If stream 0 is already secure and a sender wants to start sending some data over stream 1, my idea is to generate a random key and send it over stream 0 with info that it is for securing stream 1. But is this safe even when stream 0 is already secure?

I was thinking of using SCTP (for other reasons) and do security management over stream 0 and data over streams 1 and up. EDIT: The idea is to speed up starting to send data by the sender generating a key for a new stream X (X > 0) and sending that key over stream 0 and then sending encrypted data over stream X.

This question is the inverse of Has networking using multiple “unrelated” connections to share an encrypted data stream been researched? The streams I want to secure are related by being part of the same association with no intent to bond them (they would stay independent).

Tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackSecurity/status/606787180015579137

occurred Jun 5, 2015 at 11:38

copyedit

Source Link

edited Jun 5, 2015 at 10:52

StackzOfZtuff

18.3k
1
55
86

iI refer to multi-streaming as the ability to send 2 or more streams of some unit of data (block, byte streams) in one establisedestablished association/context. SCTP is an example and the protocal iprotocol I was thinking about when this question came to mind. how How could iI efficiently secure data sent over multiple streams.?

what iWhat I see in many documents is something equivantequivalent to N handshakes have to be performed for N streams. this This seems to be suggesting each stream is independently secured. a A counter example would be to add multi-stream-over-one-stream to TLS instead of naked TCP. but But that would not include independent loss/order recovery.

what iWhat I was wondering about is making security more efficient over multi-streaming (like SCTP) by first securing one stream then using that stream to secure more streams without the full handshake. if If stream 0 is already secure and a sender wants to start sending somsome data over stream 1, my idea is to generate a random key and send it over stream 0 with info that it is for securing stream 1. but But is this safe even when stream 0 is already secure?

iI was thinking of using SCTP (for other reasons) and do security management over stream 0 and data over steams 1 and up. EDIT: theThe idea is to speed up starting to send data by the sender generating a key for new stream X (X > 0) and sending it and X over stream 0 and then sending encrypted data over stream X.

thisThis question is the inverse of Has networking using multiple “unrelated” connections to share an encrypted data stream been researched? the streams iI want to secure are related by being part of the same association with no intent to bond them (they would stay independent).

i refer to multi-streaming as the ability to send 2 or more streams of some unit of data (block, byte streams) in one establised association/context. SCTP is an example and the protocal i was thinking about when this question came to mind. how could i efficiently secure data sent over multiple streams.

what i see in many documents is something equivant to N handshakes have to be performed for N streams. this seems to be suggesting each stream is independently secured. a counter example would be to add multi-stream-over-one-stream to TLS instead of naked TCP. but that would not include independent loss/order recovery

what i was wondering about is making security more efficient over multi-streaming (like SCTP) by first securing one stream then using that stream to secure more streams without the full handshake. if stream 0 is already secure and a sender wants to start sending som data over stream 1, my idea is to generate a random key and send it over stream 0 with info that it is for securing stream 1. but is this safe even when stream 0 is already secure?

i was thinking of using SCTP (for other reasons) and do security management over stream 0 and data over steams 1 and up. EDIT: the idea is to speed up starting to send data by the sender generating a key for new stream X (X > 0) and sending it and X over stream 0 and then sending encrypted data over stream X.

this question is the inverse of Has networking using multiple “unrelated” connections to share an encrypted data stream been researched? the streams i want to secure are related by being part of the same association with no intent to bond them (they would stay independent).

I refer to multi-streaming as the ability to send 2 or more streams of some unit of data (block, byte streams) in one established association/context. SCTP is an example and the protocol I was thinking about when this question came to mind. How could I efficiently secure data sent over multiple streams?

What I see in many documents is something equivalent to N handshakes have to be performed for N streams. This seems to be suggesting each stream is independently secured. A counter example would be to add multi-stream-over-one-stream to TLS instead of naked TCP. But that would not include independent loss/order recovery.

What I was wondering about is making security more efficient over multi-streaming (like SCTP) by first securing one stream then using that stream to secure more streams without the full handshake. If stream 0 is already secure and a sender wants to start sending some data over stream 1, my idea is to generate a random key and send it over stream 0 with info that it is for securing stream 1. But is this safe even when stream 0 is already secure?

I was thinking of using SCTP (for other reasons) and do security management over stream 0 and data over steams 1 and up. EDIT: The idea is to speed up starting to send data by the sender generating a key for new stream X (X > 0) and sending it and X over stream 0 and then sending encrypted data over stream X.

This question is the inverse of Has networking using multiple “unrelated” connections to share an encrypted data stream been researched? the streams I want to secure are related by being part of the same association with no intent to bond them (they would stay independent).