Re: [HASMAT] moving forward - WG name

Marsh Ray <marsh@extendedsubset.com> Mon, 23 August 2010 16:27 UTC

Return-Path: <marsh@extendedsubset.com>
X-Original-To: hasmat@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hasmat@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D7803A68CD for <hasmat@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 09:27:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.077
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.077 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.522, 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 LTrih3KmqDQh for <hasmat@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 09:27:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org (mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org [204.13.248.71]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 215933A689C for <hasmat@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 09:27:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xs01.extendedsubset.com ([69.164.193.58]) by mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from <marsh@extendedsubset.com>) id 1OnZsU-0006y1-EF; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 16:28:06 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.15] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xs01.extendedsubset.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 073BC608D; Mon, 23 Aug 2010 16:28:05 +0000 (UTC)
X-Mail-Handler: MailHop Outbound by DynDNS
X-Originating-IP: 69.164.193.58
X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/mailhop/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information)
X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX1+0Qi1E9Zr8pHD3iEy0d7LXbUFGCUvP2AQ=
Message-ID: <4C72A195.4050507@extendedsubset.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 11:28:05 -0500
From: Marsh Ray <marsh@extendedsubset.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100713 Thunderbird/3.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tobias Gondrom <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org>
References: <4C6EC48A.5020803@stpeter.im> <4C725267.3010908@kuix.de> <4C729F21.3020900@gondrom.org>
In-Reply-To: <4C729F21.3020900@gondrom.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: hasmat@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [HASMAT] moving forward - WG name
X-BeenThere: hasmat@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: HTTP Application Security Minus Authentication and Transport <hasmat.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hasmat>, <mailto:hasmat-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hasmat>
List-Post: <mailto:hasmat@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hasmat-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hasmat>, <mailto:hasmat-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 16:27:34 -0000

Perhaps it depends on what the group wants to do?

Websec is nice. Not a revolutionary name.

It seems appropriate for this sentence from the proposed charter:
> The goal of this working group is to standardize a small number of
> selected specifications that have proven to improve security of Internet
> Web applications.

Personally, I think the current name is pretty awesome.

- Marsh



On 08/23/2010 11:17 AM, Tobias Gondrom wrote:
>   believe "websec" was proposed during BOF meeting and actually "hasmat"
> reminded me of "hazardous materials" at first, so would support to go
> for a different name if people like to.
> Have no problem if the name is general, after all the charter and not
> the name determines WG scope (and as the name will stay even if you may
> recharter at some point, so general can rather be an advantage for a name).
>
> htsec is fine for me, too (though personally I may slightly prefer websec).
> Would be against webappsec due to ambiguity and actually adding "app" in
> the middle doesn't help and makes the name unnecessarily long (there are
> practical benefits from short WG names).
>
> Tobias
>
>
> would agree with websec
>
> On 08/23/2010 11:50 AM, Kai Engert wrote:
>>   On 20.08.2010 20:08, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> 3. Name. Some people have said that "HASMAT" isn't very descriptive of
>>> the subject matter, and that we might want something like "WEBSEC". As
>>> long as folks don't think "WEBSEC" means that we'd be working on
>>> everything under the sun related to the security of the web, I'd be fine
>>> with a name like that. Other suggestions are welcome.
>>
>> "websec" sounds indeed very general, while the meaning of "hasmat"
>> focuses on a smaller subset.
>>
>> I wanted to propose "WebAppSec", but there's already
>> http://www.webappsec.org/
>>
>> What about HTSEC ? (hypertext security)
>>
>> Kai
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> HASMAT mailing list
>> HASMAT@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hasmat
>
> _______________________________________________
> HASMAT mailing list
> HASMAT@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hasmat