• TiffyBelle@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    All well and good, but sadly this relies on the hosts managing DNS to include specific entries in their DNS configuration for keys to use during the encryption process. Unfortunately the vast majority of hosts probably won’t be bothered to do this, similar to DNSSEC.

    • Gestrid@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Apparently, Cloudflare already supports ECH, and a not-insignificant number of websites use them.

    • pazukaza@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wouldn’t it be better if reverse proxies simply had a “default key” meant to encrypt the SNI after an unencrypted “hello” is received?

      Including DNS in this seems weird.

      • p1mrx@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        What would stop a MITM attacker from replacing the key? The server can’t sign the key if it doesn’t know which domain the client is trusting.