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

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Sat, 05 November 2016 21:56 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 08F541295EC for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Nov 2016 14:56:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.998 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, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, 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 sgN9mG8P8X3N for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Nov 2016 14:56:16 -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 C66B31295F1 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sat, 5 Nov 2016 14:56:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1c38sc-0003yV-Rl for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 05 Nov 2016 21:52:02 +0000
Resent-Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2016 21:52:02 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1c38sc-0003yV-Rl@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 1c38sI-0003rD-OE for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sat, 05 Nov 2016 21:51:42 +0000
Received: from mail-qt0-f174.google.com ([209.85.216.174]) 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 1c38sC-0004mg-HP for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sat, 05 Nov 2016 21:51:37 +0000
Received: by mail-qt0-f174.google.com with SMTP id p16so67839322qta.0 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Sat, 05 Nov 2016 14:51:16 -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=eFS+d9W1znFv7JZxE2gJ+EvK3IkKlrqWRY4R2A5Y3zA=; b=rZ+8mpnakneZIrY4XrKyF6fgkxCOJWras26KQ4UmODo5nnNxLgonGzIGQBEHbLUrv7 qsxAKvrFA0nSBMQtwG6SLmBqWJ+fAmhu6F1NvEbFJunACRIkyYZ8aNkOi8+Fio53QC0p +Bh5QQgt8Kz5t8bFN8yUKSJuvCDaJZbNp6tCNPgBHoeBaiJmOZNoSevH6nFRzGkYG4Iv oyRB4uClrmV+Cpy/6ULCven0yQzwvAzCP6hvFVMTQolf7fCvqGdH1GiwAS4CwO2aRHoK OjpaVSc3m+g7/ld4DwGC2xtXs86WypFHEUrSLR9yIEb2BH+kyCMOf/nIQQ0Lnj/gesgx XG1g==
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=eFS+d9W1znFv7JZxE2gJ+EvK3IkKlrqWRY4R2A5Y3zA=; b=SCkVgAESeMgZn2RV2tmW+Q9hZoXhbBTJC9C9LXGoAW29cvFDLqtMPetGW9tL5N/pxl Ip+YXJ7jJhx4CANBok7QiWAdKHpMXqpkllrTOj5W1U3EWLKxqgLYrXnc5sKs8m4JWGiU rJ1//GqDmt+6T0CNMugZc4Oh8DhtRKG0E5YLXcaEC78jTYp3d61mW8cu8ttPBkUbzvbe cL85TqLf/1fPrTvc4zcnwTJlz9KHyiXTEpDFsRgGuWUFxiTrTftKPMxvfsLDdgTCOomo HBJ539Mf+psayRuKiNI2lhdfrdIaoYrRmwX8SWvAmTjyHwPq0QkeJkxqEJuPgrVNwcRL iOZA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngveXYl4HFdcs5C6+0m/HSQ8gKCL/WoN0HHS0Ni/3M1TUJNNLmX1TPRMXCzZE2dmbnHM5/QRECNIDI+1NFQ==
X-Received: by 10.200.38.177 with SMTP id 46mr8216270qto.107.1478382670688; Sat, 05 Nov 2016 14:51:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.140.85.7 with HTTP; Sat, 5 Nov 2016 14:51:10 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201611040423.uA44Na1e009784@shell.siilo.fmi.fi>
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> <CABkgnnUanWhMncsp2XDZgwXjCn7K7+39mvmXWZKFjMDHw6UwOA@mail.gmail.com> <201611040423.uA44Na1e009784@shell.siilo.fmi.fi>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 08:51:10 +1100
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWWMuf5kXE4T8xTqfKPhpTymS6mMr3Q_RtdnDSsfnUDHQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org>
Cc: Erik Nygren <erik@nygren.org>, HTTP working group mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.216.174; envelope-from=martin.thomson@gmail.com; helo=mail-qt0-f174.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.1
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=0.097, 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, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1c38sC-0004mg-HP b17a0052b91ff0fd1c01a1005b982fd4
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/CABkgnnWWMuf5kXE4T8xTqfKPhpTymS6mMr3Q_RtdnDSsfnUDHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/32848
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 4 November 2016 at 15:23, Kari Hurtta <hurtta-ietf@elmme-mailer.org> wrote:
> Only one origin per connection ("dedicated-connection") is
> better to use some other mechanism because that look
> someting which is not limited to Opportunistic HTTP Security.
> It looks like something which is wanted also for "https".


Yeah, I'm wondering if this isn't a) enough for this mixed scheme
concern, and b) enough for the origin frame.