IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Call for Adoption: draft-richanna-http-message-signatures

Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> Tue, 04 February 2020 01:27 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 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A3CB12004A for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 17:27:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 6XHSkN8udlTS for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 17:27:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8496C12001A for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 17:27:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1iymxP-0001kO-Vs for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2020 01:24:52 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 01:24:51 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1iymxP-0001kO-Vs@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <sayrer@gmail.com>) id 1iymxM-0001jH-Gx for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2020 01:24:48 +0000
Received: from mail-io1-xd42.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::d42]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <sayrer@gmail.com>) id 1iymxL-0007OJ-B1 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2020 01:24:48 +0000
Received: by mail-io1-xd42.google.com with SMTP id k24so19056709ioc.4 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Mon, 03 Feb 2020 17:24:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=pJQ5s0WjThX7ijcPxXRmlV6S+P7A6snx/LvBwEzfV0M=; b=lItJb7vDkRkJk0Qj0ncd7JlbD53gsGSBc77V1JvMx30NhYI6StJOVwjuTTlil8SGox PHrGyKXIjQSle+yEleL5F7uGlPZyZfuaqiMYx9mP8V1eDnXSAcq1UQiFPuRXAq9tXeFx 7FjuNWvoIcsKKwSlZajb7/cnJcb0wKuiO///OsaiDpSpDA1JqGY5U2/oHYVrlj8e96WL AvBuj2B0KrVVbQBt+d49edIQYybRezfGvoCmvUbTJCx4Pgs73VDRK6hZ48XROFUEhwMN YyAbFlalrUA7pIM0TJjZ+6upk4LwW+QpHdbuWAv8tNIXKNNXEtZBdWYP1BQSHufy0cef UPJw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pJQ5s0WjThX7ijcPxXRmlV6S+P7A6snx/LvBwEzfV0M=; b=LLYeofsMzzAk/CS1sfAvN+bA7zFEx9d/hUGGu58PBe3JPNewYOOP2g/g+v8HmZtcdS K9r5a45pqMoREDlRE9umMXpHFxie+bIlBF8WRYWRUjWq5dSLNEwPmhG/djBFBqTuUD3k 639SIEjr3nNK1dFOPXzAgAaPQlxs3tls+qYNPAPCv4sjd2CPBN6jzpgl7qWWgKEV4SeM n3jtDUCF30skXseQ6GlJlmu1myFM6Hn52e83V81DPR/dNfsEkq7qUBujhoSpN8RApAXX MoUYBnerjq3j+VC3V0VYJppRyRGSWgKiexPFn7Wk0ne1hk0DVTMwTTCmARZwAV0sGLEk 8mdw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVuDREdfjmcyJfDNVkHLBKE0iWblPccKXIVHr7IhvVM5M9cbsfc GtQ/54RrudOFhgzsKbHL9IpX8Wyo67abdOKO0b8fKJZL
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxrMkf0HHVKvXjnnqih2h2T2kzhQIQzSDnPVtAUkndUVke1aRSqOFYeyIGBrJGbRxs6QaI5nRCuXlvhjUNSX98=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:731a:: with SMTP id e26mr20876869ioh.254.1580779486411; Mon, 03 Feb 2020 17:24:46 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <76565D7E-C7F5-4D5D-BE3A-6E686E096B14@mnot.net> <CABcZeBNb2=rbSWe-O5921ddns83N2FtvY+u5of-gw8AvVVHoOQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBNb2=rbSWe-O5921ddns83N2FtvY+u5of-gw8AvVVHoOQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2020 17:24:33 -0800
Message-ID: <CAChr6SweKS5FrKQcghZuX=D+8xP_F1y6ZJ2=eA=6sGFG7SNNcg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c181fe059db5e759"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::d42; envelope-from=sayrer@gmail.com; helo=mail-io1-xd42.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1iymxL-0007OJ-B1 d1d1f67250333bf5acb9efa64499c257
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Call for Adoption: draft-richanna-http-message-signatures
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/CAChr6SweKS5FrKQcghZuX=D+8xP_F1y6ZJ2=eA=6sGFG7SNNcg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/37336
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: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 8:49 AM Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> I do not believe we should initiate work in HTTP on HTTP Request
> signatures starting with draft-richanna-http-message-signatures.
>
> My high order concern is that we seem to be starting to build a
> piecemeal object security system for HTTP without any kind of
> coordination or common architecture. So far, we have standardized or
> proposals to standardize:
>

AWSv4 is the de facto standard, for better or worse.

I view this task as an inspection of that.

thanks,
Rob

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email