RFC 9266: Channel Bindings for TLS 1.3 support

[Neustradamus]

Dear @jonhoo,

Can you add the support of RFC 9266: Channel Bindings for TLS 1.3?

• https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9266

Channel Bindings for TLS: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5929

• XEP-0388: Extensible SASL Profile: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0388.html
• XEP-0440: SASL Channel-Binding Type Capability: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0440.html
• XEP-0474: SASL SCRAM Downgrade Protection: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0474.html
• XEP-0480: SASL Upgrade Tasks: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0480.html

Little details, to know easily:

• tls-unique for TLS =< 1.2
• tls-server-end-point
• tls-exporter for TLS = 1.3

I think that you have seen the jabber.ru MITM and Channel Binding is the solution:

• https://notes.valdikss.org.ru/jabber.ru-mitm/
• https://snikket.org/blog/on-the-jabber-ru-mitm/
• https://www.devever.net/~hl/xmpp-incident
• https://blog.jmp.chat/b/certwatch

Thanks in advance.

Linked to:

• State of Play scram-sasl/info#1
• SCRAM-SHA-1(-PLUS) + SCRAM-SHA-256(-PLUS) + SCRAM-SHA-512(-PLUS) + SCRAM-SHA3-512(-PLUS) supports #275

[jonhoo]

Hi there! Channel binding would be a fairly substantial addition to the crate, and I'm not in a position to take on that work at the moment. I know @dequbed also wants them, and started some of the work required to get there in #243, but I think that has stalled out a little (though it's quite close!). If you would like to see this land, I suggest helping with getting that over the finish line, and then potentially looking to file a follow-up PR that incorporates channel binding.