IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: RIP: Crypto-Key header field

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 25 November 2016 00:33 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 DD08E12A0A0 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:33:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.998 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=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 YSuExcl82Ncf for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:33:22 -0800 (PST)
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 A1CCC129584 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:33:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1cA4Oh-0001qz-P0 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2016 00:29:47 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 00:29:47 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1cA4Oh-0001qz-P0@frink.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1cA4OZ-0001qD-JT for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2016 00:29:39 +0000
Received: from mail-qk0-f180.google.com ([209.85.220.180]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1cA4OT-0003Iy-CJ for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2016 00:29:34 +0000
Received: by mail-qk0-f180.google.com with SMTP id n21so63649331qka.3 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:29:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=MvfWLYKaGM3X96bOoT/zE0x7/3PL9hLBnc+MvQw1cgg=; b=D465vd8tW0IESW0ltbE9f+ZpbilKzHXeyQXqD4eTQiJSE0EOLyf/REcyDH/7ulxcwe lexAgq9SLvrkHFWkE11RBDjuLTOM9RpSEa5DVS1UU3DeBgMyfVZJk8xyuwpny2p5CjFn 4rUQdVFGzSWhxGdiUdT8b2o6yjbwKJu+6SROtmPLchmMyoCaqgRh6KPUtfBZpCwP9ZwV tHzMBhcXWvAwYCfSaNcGbVQU1e2DUh4H4zHxAuuZgl2clGo8Gchzeyp3Znqwgy4i2NOs CfNXLa7713A7CoOPVWhB6dCt0NxK+ahd3TewdYnSdcyxo6b4FKjmPcUCpUKog8ro/rDk ArDQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=MvfWLYKaGM3X96bOoT/zE0x7/3PL9hLBnc+MvQw1cgg=; b=Vw6daSX82H/kX2tsQPZQrfQ2lKb1hlYqnbdMxxihqSVvZs9moFIn6pVvCgEgci82Cf XF2XWgxb+hTZnxblhhsjF18kkNJgNM0QXp8y1ihdbCR7j0qTTQzTaRJVbr9kCvM0um8w qxnFKA6ETbHBSuX2ay33gv3VbxvQ7IJomTBnM93pL8V9H5zE6trCxGlMqdusyITT/xQf k77XB9H5AGnyju87+VsNz+MEWzg5GzK7ePMS0/efoy4Lsgfvyw084eVMZJx3VQXwFoh5 25Q0lxv0YET1ZyL2J9afioALK9O2Wdjo12T+vDAvWVh2sVKXyh8Bo2ysvctLJcyBHUHp 7S1w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC02wgMWgVcf9fdkZovsCvqvMQx4CXFNRlPMqHrVNduRoidDTjYEGwIV7/Z4azfshr9bkVdXlHMjblJFg2A==
X-Received: by 10.55.99.141 with SMTP id x135mr4089548qkb.147.1480033747106; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:29:07 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.85.101 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:29:06 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <23699f01-1a0f-1b2f-edcd-c21dbce4d5a8@gmx.de>
References: <CABkgnnXQ7jFX+U0Ziai_kmja740h-6MBmBG5vxNF5Tr2fpTX3w@mail.gmail.com> <41b1ccf6-32ff-c450-9f61-8f51feb99dad@gmx.de> <CABkgnnV4wtcnZBajJy0VCYXbTQ=LDjGuytz4iOzOLVvVHqB24Q@mail.gmail.com> <249e067b-7c37-9aa2-2937-2bfbbebd033b@gmx.de> <dd003ab2-323b-d617-29b8-c39eee8915ec@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <CABkgnnVd+414QH8F7dMmmFmAd5S0cTXbUC12pQoapUdpoAYvZg@mail.gmail.com> <23699f01-1a0f-1b2f-edcd-c21dbce4d5a8@gmx.de>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 11:29:06 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVuS8qJH7THnsQPGYwooby7Hkn=wfv0jHDDkBL5z2Ko4w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.220.180; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-qk0-f180.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.1
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.103, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1cA4OT-0003Iy-CJ 0606b3750a6c8610b8374005ea322147
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: RIP: Crypto-Key header field
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnVuS8qJH7THnsQPGYwooby7Hkn=wfv0jHDDkBL5z2Ko4w@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/33000
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 24 November 2016 at 17:20, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> Which?

Webpush was considering using the field.  It's not final yet, but only
because there are questions about how to signal keys elsewhere, but
you can see a preview:
http://webpush-wg.github.io/webpush-encryption/pack_key_hack/

>> a usage that needs strings, then UTF-8 is available to them.
>
>
> Which implies that those who define the use of dictionaries and the way they
> are transmitted have full control over what keyids are used. Is this the
> case?

I don't see why not.  For instance, out-of-band can easily restrict
this to UTF-8 (or if you get hit on the head some time in the near
future, the special JSON UTF-16 with unpaired surrogates mess).

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status