Middleboxes for Validation of Encrypted FaaS Requests: TLMSP vs Delegated Credentials

The widespread adoption of TLS has significantly enhanced the end-to-end security of client-server communications, at the price of making security middleboxes incapable of performing deep packet inspection and less effective. This paper compares two recent protocols that received attention in the industry that make it possible for middleboxes to read packet content with the supervision of the server: the Transport Layer Middlebox Security Protocol (TLMSP), standardized by ETSI, and the Delegated Credentials (DC) extension of TLS, standardized by IETF. The former solution allows fine-grained access control to the payload, but requires modifications to the TLS client, hampering its adoption. The latter solution gives limited-time full plaintext access to the middlebox without the server's supervision, but without leaking the server's private keys, making its adoption easier. We integrated our mechanism for policy-checking FaaS requests into publicly available implementations of those protocols and extensively evaluated the performance of both solutions identifying the additional latency components. Results show that the latency added by TLMSP is orders of magnitude higher than the baseline. On the other hand, we observed that DC additional latency is comparable to the baseline, making the latter solution suitable for deployment.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-06-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/netsoft64993.2025.11080543
Primary Topic
Cloud Data Security Solutions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Middleboxes for Validation of Encrypted FaaS Requests: TLMSP vs Delegated Credentials

Giacomo Verticale, Davide Andreotti, R. Nava
Cloud Data Security Solutions
article

Middleboxes for Validation of Encrypted FaaS Requests: TLMSP vs Delegated Credentials

Giacomo Verticale, Davide Andreotti, R. Nava
article en

Abstract

The widespread adoption of TLS has significantly enhanced the end-to-end security of client-server communications, at the price of making security middleboxes incapable of performing deep packet inspection and less effective. This paper compares two recent protocols that received attention in the industry that make it possible for middleboxes to read packet content with the supervision of the server: the Transport Layer Middlebox Security Protocol (TLMSP), standardized by ETSI, and the Delegated Credentials (DC) extension of TLS, standardized by IETF. The former solution allows fine-grained access control to the payload, but requires modifications to the TLS client, hampering its adoption. The latter solution gives limited-time full plaintext access to the middlebox without the server's supervision, but without leaking the server's private keys, making its adoption easier. We integrated our mechanism for policy-checking FaaS requests into publicly available implementations of those protocols and extensively evaluated the performance of both solutions identifying the additional latency components. Results show that the latency added by TLMSP is orders of magnitude higher than the baseline. On the other hand, we observed that DC additional latency is comparable to the baseline, making the latter solution suitable for deployment.

Politecnico di Milano (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 74%
Cloud Data Security Solutions
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.