Re: 2.2. Interaction with "https" URIs | Re: Op-sec simplification

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Fri, 04 November 2016 00:21 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 3121B1294B1 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 17:21:35 -0700 (PDT)
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 l6-zzUEYEdGA for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 17:21:33 -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 4268F129408 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 17:21:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1c2SC4-0002wZ-G7 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 04 Nov 2016 00:17:16 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2016 00:17:16 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1c2SC4-0002wZ-G7@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 1c2SBy-0002uz-OI for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 04 Nov 2016 00:17:10 +0000
Received: from mail-qt0-f173.google.com ([209.85.216.173]) 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 1c2SBq-0005k4-9R for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 04 Nov 2016 00:17:05 +0000
Received: by mail-qt0-f173.google.com with SMTP id n6so39162722qtd.1 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 03 Nov 2016 17:16:41 -0700 (PDT)
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=WLjfzLEMNZG1nnQpWbzW5Eq8ykCt0HLRKaPg0AwiM+o=; b=04zdc9yVNi7KyMl+pP89fYrfE42Ru9GOp2IFCp1MAwJgvJUEbiFwvlKvs+vZ6xNds0 2sYTj3mTQ4l/mLBGKsZnGkKnJ3AHXpoxOcpwiYp5NXq0RQFgDOK0I5mg2ju5x0SirTtw NzMDvOVdRawDsn3tgQF/JWtlmd1EErWyeMK5IQTAdt3xBJ8RqNwqCrL53mqPQzG7hiPk 2OQwmM6wWFWu90rah4vcn8kmh0Nw4YrCqCRYKPU/KBlND93CxjEqj6Ia8EeQLYFVkBHj Kwe/a5M6air8MGA3R9RwRUhvecSPTiQrqtdzpDeQmaWI2kcBfe6dFoynquIIHhQidB6f KiKQ==
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=WLjfzLEMNZG1nnQpWbzW5Eq8ykCt0HLRKaPg0AwiM+o=; b=X3Bf9cQ7r6TyTSi2PHP7SPubj43Vx3/LXeuPPRQCRG8UV0ueBtdIPGvMq11l6dyCpg FQd5+uc47UBDi3coRO3RiQP3Z8/PCCoveiOLqZToyZ3FY4XYpkUrWXLRA7Y6E47FrvsB lAcGYs+yfLL+N7d0mMDz5LWpSlRAjGK9cFEzgG419SYhjPxaS7cIZAnoEFJt2WqRKg2C zdhTTc5wErZ+1SkLGZV4XYl/yN13jJwPO+qgbOXKfoiRsLmTdbWvT1no1ublMH6lNzes ZmWCdYYuVNopHW03jkKQmevMqdwsFE6qnXcIdK6eHHpDVjF4pZlzNIj92YHeSk6GBH/D ocPQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngveTAcwS3Gz2yR4OEETeUdM+COfaIxUlGZ84h2IESsci+XE9+5jSEzpyKHzjJPRZuPEVb9SG2l8/teppgA==
X-Received: by 10.237.53.132 with SMTP id c4mr11235485qte.85.1478218596035; Thu, 03 Nov 2016 17:16:36 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.85.7 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Nov 2016 17:16:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKC-DJiGp3g26nDZJg4tor4B7-om+BZZp=Hgp4JXNik_ibDPkQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20161031053239.E9C6D12F5D@welho-filter3.welho.com> <20161101172202.BE19F12310@welho-filter1.welho.com> <CABkgnnWhcp_tVx9M9FTOdSF-U5EoAzdNNVZaYzjdxUGhHydX7w@mail.gmail.com> <201611020548.uA25m4Wm026906@shell.siilo.fmi.fi> <CABkgnnUL+AJEi=92K95f22vrx17Rmm0j1rEahhwu-my3DPcEwA@mail.gmail.com> <CAKC-DJiGp3g26nDZJg4tor4B7-om+BZZp=Hgp4JXNik_ibDPkQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 11:16:35 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnUanWhMncsp2XDZgwXjCn7K7+39mvmXWZKFjMDHw6UwOA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Erik Nygren <erik@nygren.org>
Cc: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>, HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.216.173; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-qt0-f173.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.347, 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 1c2SBq-0005k4-9R ac16d775669857fac5f118dae5a2fbdc
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: 2.2. Interaction with "https" URIs | Re: Op-sec simplification
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/CABkgnnUanWhMncsp2XDZgwXjCn7K7+39mvmXWZKFjMDHw6UwOA@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32846
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 3 November 2016 at 07:02, Erik Nygren <erik@nygren.org> wrote:
> An example of why this could be bad would be a CDN server that terminates
> both HTTP and HTTPS over TLS but demuxes them such that HTTPS requires TLS
> to content origin but HTTP is allowed to go cleartext to content origin.
> When a single TLS connection demuxes to a mixture of TLS and cleartext
> traffic, this feels like asking for increased trouble and attack surfaces.
> Prohibiting mixed-scheme on the incoming connection makes this feel much
> safer.

I am almost inclined to say that you don't get to use the feature if
you are concerned about this causing issues of that sort.  Or, as some
of us have discussed, a new h2 setting that prohibits coalescing might
be a simpler option.

Kari's solution works, though it opens other possibilities, and I'm
concerned we're off down the rabbit hole again:

{ "http://...": "mixed-scheme", --> open season
  "http://...": "single-scheme", --> only one scheme per connection
  "http://...": "dedicated-connection" } --> only one origin per connection