Re: draft-reschke-rfc2231-in-http security considerations
Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Tue, 23 February 2010 16:21 UTC
Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 693E428C148 for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 08:21:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.504
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.504 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.905, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E2q1Tc9j62ow for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 08:21:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 2F1C528C0EB for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 08:21:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 23 Feb 2010 16:23:12 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.105]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp061) with SMTP; 23 Feb 2010 17:23:12 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX185wdURjxE5ce7DVqoFvAWx4MNLOATo8rA0c0PVRK 9BzFTZ9Bw8Tf9N
Message-ID: <4B8400E8.6030202@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:23:04 +0100
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060516 Thunderbird/1.5.0.4 Mnenhy/0.7.4.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Subject: Re: draft-reschke-rfc2231-in-http security considerations
References: <4B7E53B8.6070805@ninebynine.org>
In-Reply-To: <4B7E53B8.6070805@ninebynine.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-FuHaFi: 0.58999999999999997
Cc: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:21:11 -0000
On 19.02.2010 10:02, Graham Klyne wrote: > Reviewing: > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-reschke-rfc2231-in-http-09.txt > > I note that the security considerations section says nothing about > possible character "spoofing" - i.e. making a displayed prompt or value > appear to be something other than it is. E.g. Non-ASCII characters have > been used to set up exploits involving dodgy URIs that may appear to a > user to be legitimate. > ... Good catch. Would the following work for you? -- snip -- 5. Security Considerations The format described in this document makes it possible to transport non-ASCII characters, and thus enables character "spoofing" scenarios, in which a displayed value appears to be something other than it is. Furthermore, there are known attack scenarios relating to decoding UTF-8. See Section 10 of [RFC3629] for more information on both topics. -- snip -- Best regards, Julian
- draft-reschke-rfc2231-in-http security considerat… Graham Klyne
- Re: draft-reschke-rfc2231-in-http security consid… Julian Reschke