IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Client Certificates - re-opening discussion

Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi> Fri, 18 September 2015 18:36 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 F192F1B31A0 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 11:36:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.912
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.912 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 bxGZAJ-mTRF7 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 11:36:50 -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 89FE01B319A for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 11:36:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1Zd0UD-0000IU-VY for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 18:34:18 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 18:34:17 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1Zd0UD-0000IU-VY@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>) id 1Zd0U9-0000He-2t for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 18:34:13 +0000
Received: from emh04.mail.saunalahti.fi ([62.142.5.110]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>) id 1Zd0U7-0004SZ-C3 for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 18:34:12 +0000
Received: from LK-Perkele-VII (a91-155-194-207.elisa-laajakaista.fi [91.155.194.207]) by emh04.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id C442C1A25E4; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 21:33:47 +0300 (EEST)
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 21:33:47 +0300
From: Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>
To: "henry.story@bblfish.net" <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20150918183347.GA20694@LK-Perkele-VII>
References: <63DECDF0-AB59-4AFD-8E48-8C2526FD6047@mnot.net> <20150918174530.GA9394@LK-Perkele-VII> <FAA0B16A-C985-4741-91AB-2B08001100A8@bblfish.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <FAA0B16A-C985-4741-91AB-2B08001100A8@bblfish.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: Ilari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=62.142.5.110; envelope-from=ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi; helo=emh04.mail.saunalahti.fi
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-1.264, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1Zd0U7-0004SZ-C3 06e406a538eaed321cc91c11453462b1
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Client Certificates - re-opening discussion
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/20150918183347.GA20694@LK-Perkele-VII>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/30222
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 Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 07:11:20PM +0100, henry.story@bblfish.net wrote:
> 
> You mean: don't send the certificate, link to it on the web?
> Then you are close to WebID-TLS 
>   http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/
> WebID-TLS only published the public key, but one could
> also publish the full certificate. ( people had suggested
> that before, but we were waiting for larger use cases to
> consider it )

No, I meant sending the certificate chain. But if the equivalent to
the certificate chain is just a single raw public key, one could
stick it to headers (but I suppose for implementability reasons
one would not do that).

> The advanage following that pattern is you put the certificate 
> anywhere you like, not just in .well-known.

Which causes all the security issues from retretiving URLs. And
also, most of the users probably won't have any place to stick
the cert to.


-Ilari

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email