Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-10

Hervé Ruellan <herve.ruellan@crf.canon.fr> Fri, 23 January 2015 15:25 UTC

Return-Path: <Herve.Ruellan@crf.canon.fr>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDF021A9148; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 07:25:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.26
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.26 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ucckMwEVps_M; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 07:25:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from inari-msr.crf.canon.fr (inari-msr.crf.canon.fr [194.2.158.67]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 458E51A9145; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 07:25:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mir-msr.corp.crf.canon.fr (mir-msr.corp.crf.canon.fr [172.19.77.98]) by inari-msr.crf.canon.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t0NFPKh0018715; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:25:20 +0100
Received: from Antiope.crf.canon.fr (antiope.fesl2.crf.canon.fr [172.19.70.56]) by mir-msr.corp.crf.canon.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t0NFPJGt010287; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:25:19 +0100
Received: from timor.intra-usr.crf.canon.fr (172.20.8.117) by Antiope.crf.canon.fr (172.19.70.56) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.995.29; Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:25:19 +0100
Message-ID: <54C267DE.5040202@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:25:18 +0100
From: =?UTF-8?B?SGVydsOpIFJ1ZWxsYW4=?= <herve.ruellan@crf.canon.fr>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
References: <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949362DE459@MX104CL02.corp.emc.com> <CABkgnnUwNQUcFg5w5HFpSQrAUxtbqG_UN-_WDGop1eqqoCS+Aw@mail.gmail.com> <1421779730757.42642@crf.canon.fr> <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D243277949362E9050@MX104CL02.corp.emc.com> <B42673AB-2819-42F5-BC63-6418449FC030@piuha.net> <54C13996.2030906@crf.canon.fr> <0A78F531-9E8E-4ED1-BD8F-AAE70684DB24@piuha.net> <CABkgnnVBCK-yy9WitKCVqitcXssOHgBc2c+3UeRO09mAHa3A8Q@mail.gmail.com> <54C23CC5.7050901@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <54C23CC5.7050901@cs.tcd.ie>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [172.20.8.117]
X-ClientProxiedBy: Antiope.crf.canon.fr (172.19.70.56) To Antiope.crf.canon.fr (172.19.70.56)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/hIlgWSMNhrOEiBFTApW8SOixTiI>
Cc: "fenix@google.com" <fenix@google.com>, "General Area Review Team \(gen-art@ietf.org\)" <gen-art@ietf.org>, ietf@ietf.org, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART and OPS-Dir review of draft-ietf-httpbis-header-compression-10
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 15:25:31 -0000

On 01/23/2015 01:21 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>
>
> On 23/01/15 02:12, Martin Thomson wrote:
>> I definitely want to avoid making prescriptive statements about what to
>> protect, even couched as suggestions. However, I think that a more generic
>> statement that describes the characteristics of a header that might need
>> protection is definitely a good idea.
>>
>> If Herve doesn't get there first, I can purpose text that concentrates on
>> the coincidence of secret and small/easy-to-guess..
>
> Yep, that'd be a good addition I'd say, so long as you
> couch those characteristics as being the ones we know
> about today that contraindicate compression. Who knows
> what new attacks folks might find in future now that
> attention has been drawn to this.
>
> Cheers,
> S.

I made a proposal at https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/pull/704

Hervé.

>> On Jan 22, 2015 3:17 PM, "Jari Arkko" <jari.arkko@piuha.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for the response. I think this may slightly enhance the feeling
>>> that the list may not be needed.
>>>
>>> Jari
>>>
>>>
>>