Re: HSTS Fingerprinting.

[Mark Nottingham <[e-mail]>]

Hey Mike,

I wouldn't treat the silence as indicative of disinterest.

Would you be willing to write up a short draft explaining your proposal and submit it for discussion in Singapore (presenting remotely if necessary)? Even if you decide not to do it here, I suspect you'll be able to reuse the markdown...

Cheers,


> On 1 Oct 2019, at 11:47 pm, Mike West <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Ping!
> 
> If this group doesn't feel any particular ownership, I'm happy to try to define some web browsery behavior in W3C/WHATWG. If y'all would prefer an RFC6797bis, great!
> 
> -mike
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 3:10 AM Mike West <[e-mail]> wrote:
> A year or two ago, +John Wilander and others at Apple proposed some changes to HSTS in https://webkit.org/blog/8146/protecting-against-hsts-abuse/ that went some way towards mitigating the abuses documented in Section 14.9 of RFC6797. Given some shifts in the way we're thinking about some other concepts, I've written up a short proposal at https://github.com/mikewest/strict-navigation-security that builds upon and simplifies Apple's proposal. We discussed it briefly at yesterday's webappsec meeting, and there seems to be interest in doing something in this space.
> 
> +Mark Nottingham and +Jeff Hodges suggested that I loop this group into that conversation, as the original websec group has disbanded. Is it a topic this group would like to pick up? If not, would y'all be comfortable with us defining some web browser behavior/Fetch integration in webappsec that constrains the existing RFC?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> -mike

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/