Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

TLS1.3 TLSVersion Inconsistencies #78

Open
ne4u opened this issue Jun 26, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

TLS1.3 TLSVersion Inconsistencies #78

ne4u opened this issue Jun 26, 2022 · 4 comments

Comments

@ne4u
Copy link

ne4u commented Jun 26, 2022

Should TLSVersion for TLS1.3 be 771 or 772?

Per RFC 8446 :

In previous versions of TLS, this field was used for
version negotiation and represented the highest version number
supported by the client. Experience has shown that many servers
do not properly implement version negotiation, leading to "version
intolerance" in which the server rejects an otherwise acceptable
ClientHello with a version number higher than it supports. In
TLS 1.3, the client indicates its version preferences in the
"supported_versions" extension (Section 4.2.1) and the
legacy_version field MUST be set to 0x0303, which is the version
number for TLS 1.2. TLS 1.3 ClientHellos are identified as having
a legacy_version of 0x0303 and a supported_versions extension
present with 0x0304 as the highest version indicated therein.

I'm of the opinion that TLSVersion should be correctly set to the actual version negotiated as JA3 spec doesn't dictate where the version is sourced: the legacy version or the version from "supported_versions" extension.

I've noticed that Wireshark will report the JA3 String for TLS1.3 with 771. However, Browserleaks will report 772.

@wwhtrbbtt
Copy link

In my opinion it should be the version that is actually negotiated, not the locked 0x0303 value. More datapoints are always good

@wwhtrbbtt
Copy link

The JA3 string should represent only what is part of the initial client hello.

Ah, that something I havent thought of. Makes sense

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants
@ne4u @wwhtrbbtt and others