IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idna-update] emoji and security

Michel Suignard <michel@suignard.com> Tue, 13 March 2018 20:44 UTC

Return-Path: <michel@suignard.com>
X-Original-To: idna-update@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idna-update@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C675126CE8 for <idna-update@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 13:44:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.921
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.921 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suignard.onmicrosoft.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 1h7w2d2xoJYh for <idna-update@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 13:44:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM02-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-sn1nam02on0049.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.36.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66293126C89 for <idna-update@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 13:44:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suignard.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-suignard-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=tCojyoMmSbs/eAbYRo+VpWMQzGoKSHjH9h64LxlDew4=; b=JIBWgYkfvF1Ssd9IXSp25gLZV2T8W/5l47r5avLdksdRAxA9N1HuPnbwhOEo8Ch5fBAJhRd2RSUqTGfCtZ49v9Z2sM9IXxTuAEwySKw7QehwIkGAyLHxJ3u/XIvaayIPxKN4RuKa3XmZ0erS+deuSI0E5pyRomLAGyzKNnN32QE=
Received: from DM5PR1901MB2197.namprd19.prod.outlook.com (52.132.131.160) by DM5PR1901MB2055.namprd19.prod.outlook.com (52.132.132.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.20.548.13; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 20:44:43 +0000
Received: from DM5PR1901MB2197.namprd19.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::4c67:e6ac:d64e:4930]) by DM5PR1901MB2197.namprd19.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::4c67:e6ac:d64e:4930%13]) with mapi id 15.20.0548.021; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 20:44:43 +0000
From: Michel Suignard <michel@suignard.com>
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, "idna-update@ietf.org" <idna-update@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Idna-update] emoji and security
Thread-Index: AQHTuiH036Wme2wFFkaQ526XY0gPJqPM5EtwgAG6L4CAAAGDIA==
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 20:44:43 +0000
Message-ID: <DM5PR1901MB2197A704B3233E5236EB703AA2D20@DM5PR1901MB2197.namprd19.prod.outlook.com>
References: <533bb471-da9b-64d0-76aa-a8a1251d256b@ix.netcom.com> <DM5PR1901MB219712F39A6297F9A147312DA2D30@DM5PR1901MB2197.namprd19.prod.outlook.com> <20180313202505.ztersmy2z5xuxlvp@mx4.yitter.info>
In-Reply-To: <20180313202505.ztersmy2z5xuxlvp@mx4.yitter.info>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=michel@suignard.com;
x-originating-ip: [23.249.129.130]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM5PR1901MB2055; 7:Jxmo18Uua1pZGfmA0w9W12iYZ79H59/oBlbgDNEVYBMruVyuPYSRoAG6NqtV9fbwbynFN4dGgxvWQ2nMcmsHbD9rqAWkWntH3K3bgM40KXLWqnCk2adHq5a+gC9YrPvwkQZX02rDU20XCRSQesi0jpai8UX+qw6WubDvV6cSY8nwdRscRS7tFZ+C1OAAu+6of2U2ipK47H6hA0NJNbhDuTKprWVlER9Dq91Fz28JEYYdVbp68Pz7axncnc0nbaPn
x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SSOS;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: c7c07f75-8d0e-4ad3-7f38-08d58923402b
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(7021125)(5600026)(4604075)(3008032)(4534165)(7022125)(4603075)(4627221)(201702281549075)(7048125)(7024125)(7027125)(7028125)(7023125)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:DM5PR1901MB2055;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM5PR1901MB2055:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM5PR1901MB205534837771FDB02454FE1DA2D20@DM5PR1901MB2055.namprd19.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(192374486261705);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(6040522)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(10201501046)(3002001)(93006095)(93001095)(3231221)(944501244)(52105095)(6041310)(20161123564045)(20161123560045)(20161123562045)(2016111802025)(20161123558120)(6043046)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:DM5PR1901MB2055; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM5PR1901MB2055;
x-forefront-prvs: 0610D16BBE
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(39830400003)(396003)(366004)(376002)(39380400002)(346002)(199004)(189003)(186003)(2906002)(53936002)(26005)(2950100002)(229853002)(6246003)(110136005)(74316002)(2501003)(86362001)(3280700002)(6116002)(5660300001)(106356001)(6506007)(5250100002)(2900100001)(3846002)(33656002)(102836004)(99286004)(8676002)(66066001)(55016002)(105586002)(3660700001)(81166006)(7736002)(8936002)(9686003)(15650500001)(6436002)(81156014)(14454004)(97736004)(7696005)(316002)(76176011)(305945005)(68736007)(25786009)(478600001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DM5PR1901MB2055; H:DM5PR1901MB2197.namprd19.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: suignard.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: +hW1TpDCncVZN0XDIz1dPC/DR5B46OBBOL2rffWJIFSE3j+q7ulp/cOpeay10k/99o5CC9GEN3e5kkZWSRCes7dPw7VH3aEixpHq8a+liXZbRNBJFeygRVOe8Sfkfm4CjxV/Ji9LxTmfVqmd3ebwqwVsa06ec6Yy45FtGasnBl+nXoiBqhSU1K6VXqmaKmh+QQrJDz3Bp4KuLkmiDf5v9oRw0+YnQPbjwsFZoFvVu2EIJXnY8nf1c2JYVJCiq12Wsz8xqzTJ2D0wabelEvbi50bVemMDVWh34SnuaWnE6aKp1VWKe4qQ51sRVnEmyYZ5/3sghhBa/94JllfxGMXmLg==
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: suignard.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: c7c07f75-8d0e-4ad3-7f38-08d58923402b
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Mar 2018 20:44:43.4683 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: c72bffc7-022d-442d-a3fe-f53a3fa020d2
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR1901MB2055
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idna-update/U2b1fJyS4vgQ2ujrw1OYGOW8Cqc>
Subject: Re: [Idna-update] emoji and security
X-BeenThere: idna-update@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Internationalized Domain Names in Applications \(IDNA\) implementation and update discussions" <idna-update.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idna-update>, <mailto:idna-update-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idna-update/>
List-Post: <mailto:idna-update@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idna-update-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idna-update>, <mailto:idna-update-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 20:44:50 -0000

<<
If the general-category approach to IDNA2008 was unsuitable in 2008 because it yielded examples of things that should never in principle be identifiers, I wish someone would have made that argument.  I do not recall it having been made, and I believe I participated pretty avidly.  I do recall some people arguing that various archaic things were "not needed" or "almost always unusable by anyone", but that would have put us in the situation of going through everything one code point at a time.  There were some who wanted to try to re-do
IDNA2003 only updated for then-current versions of Unicode, but I think experience shows that wouldn't have worked out too well either.
>>
No, I still think in context, general-category approach was the best approach possible, short of developing a new category which was unpalatable to most. As you correctly pointed out in your answer in my comment about Egyptian hieroglyphs, these may be used in limited-use identifier context (for example if you want to identify base Old Egyptian phonemes) but with some caveat.

Still, what needs to happen to unlock the IANA IDN table from being frozen at Unicode 6.3? Unicode 11.0 is months away. I don't think anyone wants to revise the protocol (IDNA 2008), can't we just agree that the protocol is not 100% failsafe and move on? Documenting the problematic cases outside the protocol seems to me the best way to proceed. And it should not be a gating factor in letting IANA revise their table (although it would be great if that documentation was progressing).

Best regards

Michel

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email