IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Linking a cookie to an IP address is a very bad in 2015...

Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com> Thu, 02 April 2015 16:54 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A24B1ACDCC for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 09:54:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.012
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.012 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 1txiHWxUZrI3 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 09:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 652D01A890F for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 09:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1YdiLC-0005lW-8w for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 16:51:38 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 16:51:38 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1YdiLC-0005lW-8w@frink.w3.org>
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([128.30.52.39]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>) id 1YdiL9-0005jn-Je for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 16:51:35 +0000
Received: from mail-ob0-f175.google.com ([209.85.214.175]) by maggie.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>) id 1YdiL8-0000NS-TP for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 16:51:35 +0000
Received: by obbec2 with SMTP id ec2so136973185obb.3 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 09:51:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=jg1YsgelO/8E81BwgNdCHE5LJSskIYoNY9qAkcX6Dug=; b=yeZpULtQOIRq0zCG8WZWYv6U+FinlvIbvrIfDt7UtSJ3+rAXApTyFuA4MfI9vbvMF5 /Y2BRp584fAYnDS6QknrgZ0VLS8KMd3ayQtaNeY3ycfP+gjL1DAZk2BFJB8/t4NhtxQg mPE3ne5rSuwAjcjU6zTj5gW0Ba1VqI1VvF6YI4UZaJsBAz7IDWandCb8Y2AnusZxuoyI EQTHs34k1ZO4IGWpE8pfbvJjOlR5fELdhw9Dg4Ptg6Z25YPfYRnCWb2y1N/xUzQ+hbiw yMJrqrEf9EMz867oGDE1AKlDpfqYzGUXnwxxigDQkKwTX7xyACR848daX60tsSepUH2g XTfw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.24.97 with SMTP id t1mr47446865obf.77.1427993468974; Thu, 02 Apr 2015 09:51:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.175.9 with HTTP; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 09:51:08 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnUtb-SAE5yqZhHn-ZqsQW1uC4pCLRs4k4+JQjwTN1H09w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <D141A3E5.4146E%evyncke@cisco.com> <CACuKZqHDru45jcZiDt91gVtrTZZqJJ2XaK6k0XVKK0R4nCciFg@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnXF72bcAF7STJTwi8c-WmBNWx4GppvW=1HKX7cNX6jWcg@mail.gmail.com> <CACuKZqEw=v8CbOPbRxVXVNOKj_rGt_v4ENVzwaWbC8C1vw9oNQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUtb-SAE5yqZhHn-ZqsQW1uC4pCLRs4k4+JQjwTN1H09w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 11:51:08 -0500
Message-ID: <CACuKZqEisJgEcLq-fNfYNk8xpe8x1YzQQjTkniYK+J2tgBO0+g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Cc: "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.214.175; envelope-from=zhong.j.yu@gmail.com; helo=mail-ob0-f175.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.685, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1YdiL8-0000NS-TP e82afb3ab15522f8dfff5453f58a7f98
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Linking a cookie to an IP address is a very bad in 2015...
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CACuKZqEisJgEcLq-fNfYNk8xpe8x1YzQQjTkniYK+J2tgBO0+g@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/29222
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Martin Thomson
<martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2 April 2015 at 09:39, Zhong Yu <zhong.j.yu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The new connection will like reuse the same TLS session[1]. The
>> browser is not required to do that, but from my tests,
>> firefox/IE/chrome on Windows apparently do.
>
> Only if you hit the same server in the cluster, or the cluster has
> shared resumption AND session state.

But a session-id cookie will have the same problems.

We could embed all session data in a fat cookie, but I don't think
that's a common practice.

> HTTP is a message-based
> protocol, binding state to a connection has to be regarded as an
> optimization only.

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status