Re: New Version Notification for draft-nottingham-site-wide-headers-01.txt

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 25 November 2016 00:40 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 CCCC112A0DA for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:40:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.498
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.498 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, 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 UR0aA_Oxc6Xg for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:40:45 -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 DF20312A0D6 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:40:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1cA4Vf-0008PM-5i for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2016 00:36:59 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 00:36:59 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1cA4Vf-0008PM-5i@frink.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by frink.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1cA4VZ-0008Oa-9z for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2016 00:36:53 +0000
Received: from mail-qt0-f172.google.com ([209.85.216.172]) by mimas.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <martin.thomson@gmail.com>) id 1cA4VT-0005C0-FG for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 25 Nov 2016 00:36:48 +0000
Received: by mail-qt0-f172.google.com with SMTP id w33so52722249qtc.3 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:36:26 -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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=IZVnzqiFv9JqOGHjgPxmbz/CcOEmyhxV6qfE6zzHHOE=; b=ugj33aEfMw/JO3/gCWBpKhjLlLzOz2pSElFg3tFE6CR+DD6sxkMM/7B+DKDCRxg/RM bgBr8RwX8m4iV7qb0GVSx1eN7Fm0LLkfaR9PYQ9CTsjsPJpF6CEIWI8ez+OXTt+6H1By PQuS6HHLrimIWrUjsSGaQar9wllGfOBoDA3nj4zimHJXlzozARufOHKN/fVBhNM1THeL jvPgySqc4NiW9IW/lkQOZ5HpDCuM0LsIH96iTkQDlBQQCh/xLDleZyFGvtT8Plbi/E2e HDC0bKEguZxp+7jE8VmCTH/cafFSmGG7IWQrqqUIi4XNJtlBV7BrEl1UtqAZYqvIRVW/ p0aA==
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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=IZVnzqiFv9JqOGHjgPxmbz/CcOEmyhxV6qfE6zzHHOE=; b=hczvhaq1nerVAL/D1C7wyeB0lV9LOP8gk3HZD9YX+/G4TGxuKpQne9ZyMNxQGnqMFf XLu3fRXvUkPpttc8vY0B3xMio5biOh0EPqoaAnrZLAKXLunZOX2+K2a6HsFgLYcpxpI7 Y/vcP+TrRKtjWRRemNvoLe41YD7BvsoC01qIr6Jyt0SZnWAHw2cuYFyPZqXaXRKWDDZz uZ/s8EkJoh6xmvM98UC8tl1FbtzmJcT5A/4ELBqq9Erls+eym0j66h/ShKKm3CWLV1fH rR+X/gFGlHxwewec4xU7xjuISDR4P9N996IUCmAK0fKw8S+YXGUvbLREcHUI7YXmUxaQ 1bCg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC00H6xO2ORDJQzwHlXpa53Gpd5E+2ktKHIR4AMg78mVzahKEBlTPbpoG9UUaNX3F/mJtB52A7sVBpRnZ8g==
X-Received: by 10.237.44.161 with SMTP id g30mr4386430qtd.144.1480034180972; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:36:20 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.85.101 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Nov 2016 16:36:20 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <EEB5C37C-53CA-4B66-AC11-A43CD0383073@manicode.com>
References: <147995400666.32746.15867339667353417986.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <FCDFC352-5D68-456F-AFF4-39E9E1697AF2@mnot.net> <CABkgnnU6HrfkmqZhLFGMdKwLh2gcddH7eHbv--Tt_Vu8K+jnfw@mail.gmail.com> <EEB5C37C-53CA-4B66-AC11-A43CD0383073@manicode.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 11:36:20 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXkKrkcZWa7X5t4wdp=ngPcZ1kOBBULtcW-z+Vyghnwzw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jim Manico <jim@manicode.com>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Mike West <mkwst@google.com>, "Emily Stark (Dunn)" <estark@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.216.172; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-qt0-f172.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.353, 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1cA4VT-0005C0-FG 77bc513ba21439dcc6b41465f8abdd33
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-nottingham-site-wide-headers-01.txt
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnXkKrkcZWa7X5t4wdp=ngPcZ1kOBBULtcW-z+Vyghnwzw@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/33001
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 16:22, Jim Manico <jim@manicode.com> wrote:
> I think a blacklist for security headers has great potential harm. As a developer, I need to know explicitly what security headers are being delivered or someday a UA will start activating headers that I have not tested, am not aware of, and suddenly my site is broken because of a UA update.


I don't see how that concern is relevant in this context.