exposing sensitive information in URIs - LC comments on draft-nottingham-http-link-header-07.txt

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Thu, 21 January 2010 14:24 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBD1E3A6901 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 06:24:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.995
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.995 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.604, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 bqWs9C+U41RY for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 06:24:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02A113A680D for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 06:24:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1NXxwr-0007cl-89 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 14:23:49 +0000
Received: from bart.w3.org ([128.30.52.63]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1NXxwm-0007Zw-1P for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 14:23:44 +0000
Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]) by bart.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1NXxwk-0000mj-BO for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 14:23:44 +0000
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 21 Jan 2010 14:23:10 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.105]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp016) with SMTP; 21 Jan 2010 15:23:10 +0100
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+F1ohzBaaFUusGGPixPnQWfyBR9YnhxH4TOw2WWj ZKEXRQzsKlQOS1
Message-ID: <4B586349.5050405@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 15:23:05 +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: Apps Discuss <discuss@apps.ietf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
References: <20100119053002.5CD613A683B@core3.amsl.com> <E4FF7733-D744-4AC3-AB99-66A12868E4CE@mnot.net> <4B56E27D.800@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <4B56E27D.800@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-FuHaFi: 0.67000000000000004
Received-SPF: pass
X-SPF-Guess: pass
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: bart.w3.org 1NXxwk-0000mj-BO f7f66854bb0975ae05419cb8f3305f26
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: exposing sensitive information in URIs - LC comments on draft-nottingham-http-link-header-07.txt
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/4B586349.5050405@gmx.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/8237
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@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-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Resent-Message-Id: <E1NXxwr-0007cl-89@frink.w3.org>
Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 14:23:49 +0000

Hi,

finally a security related comment.

During IETF LC for draft-brown-versioning-link-relations we got a 
comment from Eric Rescorla:

"In general this mechanism seems sound but I'm not sure that the 
security considerations are entirely adequate. This mechanism lets you 
learn information about other versions of a resource even if you 
potentially don't have permission to view them directly. Consider a 
limiting case where each version of the resource had a name that 
contained the change set for that resource. E.g.,

http://example.com/versions/filename/_@line_50_+_FOO;@line_60_+_BAR/;

In this case, seeing other parts of the version tree leaks information 
about those versions. I don't think that this is a problem for the 
draft, but it might be useful to mention that this feature has 
implications for name construction."

I assume this is a concern that applies to the Link header in general.

Best regards, Julian