IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Max Bruce <max.bruce12@gmail.com> Wed, 01 April 2015 19:52 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 2581D1A900B for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 12:52:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.011
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 gBUeSKzJ_n20 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 12:52:35 -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 8EE001A8FD5 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 12:52:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1YdOdP-00029L-JT for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 01 Apr 2015 19:49:07 +0000
Resent-Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 19:49:07 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1YdOdP-00029L-JT@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <max.bruce12@gmail.com>) id 1YdOdN-00028G-4k for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 01 Apr 2015 19:49:05 +0000
Received: from mail-ie0-f181.google.com ([209.85.223.181]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <max.bruce12@gmail.com>) id 1YdOdK-0007Z3-Si for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Wed, 01 Apr 2015 19:49:05 +0000
Received: by ierf6 with SMTP id f6so52349951ier.2 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:48:37 -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=Pxx2avQ4wo0lylDAt00sQl8RxNcn6bhM/3IByqFTxLQ=; b=gIK6Z2F4OidE8BM4BOJA6YWLRLDhPCeAGXWqGHWxGWIbMOJQkHskMq+eU7MXHsFeRx pz3sZhiIBNE2LnxsyDAE4tE4soS6uZMpGDWtDjeiClpO/IX8Co5NP0MagG2fG58ujKSS EMPOSelQEMH7/sya5azkukJpunL2KuKCebfJSfAjibOT5jj04BdGC3kKy7qA44wZLfzP tUP7pq4clsCUXUGiW3dx5GqVqfrjU69iMy85crqqf4W1L5E3cnr/m3ztVAX62rqYUwcC y/fKu5X5cG0ZDO3hQaMVZNPYifOjKIuQDIFqkj65XxIhgeY+yNU8DgxIFeUjGVWykiGO dhwg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.27.143 with SMTP id b137mr66721553iob.76.1427917716928; Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.36.58.142 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 12:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20150401151634.GB7871@1wt.eu>
References: <D141A3E5.4146E%evyncke@cisco.com> <20150401114608.GA7832@1wt.eu> <04DD393C-711F-4C9E-B21C-B184B8972DFC@apple.com> <20150401150716.GA7871@1wt.eu> <25C792A9-56D0-452D-A46C-561A44E4F229@manico.net> <20150401151634.GB7871@1wt.eu>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 12:48:36 -0700
Message-ID: <CABb0SYQ5=5BHSH-JQ5XsCi_bQ8h5FN=WNPvAYkzy94Bm=yTVwg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Max Bruce <max.bruce12@gmail.com>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Cc: Jim Manico <jim@manico.net>, Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com>, "Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <evyncke@cisco.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1140a87c493fbb0512af00e8"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.223.181; envelope-from=max.bruce12@gmail.com; helo=mail-ie0-f181.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1YdOdK-0007Z3-Si 8cc971e5108e3d8f71ee3fb2bb0805f6
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/CABb0SYQ5=5BHSH-JQ5XsCi_bQ8h5FN=WNPvAYkzy94Bm=yTVwg@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/29193
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>

What about linking to several? I wrote a session system for my Web Server
that will only allow access to the original Session ID if the IP &
User-Agent has remained unchanged, in order to protect against session
hijacking. I've found it's highly effective, unless you IP Spoof.

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 8:16 AM, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 08:14:06AM -0700, Jim Manico wrote:
> > I think using the IP address for these purposes is fantastic - in
> intranet
> > environments where IP per user is static. :)
>
> That was my initial goal in 1999 until I realized that some clients were
> using DHCP and that it would not even work outside due to the so called
> "AOL effect" by then.
>
> Willy
>
>
>

v2.26.15 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status