Re: [Lurk] [TLS] WG Call for adoption of draft-rescorla-tls-subcerts

Nick Sullivan <nicholas.sullivan@gmail.com> Tue, 18 July 2017 13:20 UTC

Return-Path: <nicholas.sullivan@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lurk@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lurk@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89230131B41; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 06:20:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 G9fiDHbrQCDz; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 06:20:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x236.google.com (mail-oi0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1538513181F; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 06:20:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-x236.google.com with SMTP id p188so16808195oia.0; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 06:20:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=r9TQwruK4xi43Ht3P7F+XNuOKrsZXqy3857WfRO8xlU=; b=JYxKxihQwf/oQcnx+van5XQKq4sFVzNRItj/Z+K3Orn9HEmFnWamt0Qk2HFyrgQBb5 n9rYioVjGH7t7f2lUlN4XpFeDHHsH6X3TfqrKgWyOKoxAU9nU1fmmhDllDW7876cWfjq mrQJeV6Kl9txnQZoieZCFKN7pxUzsNn9ORbeCpt5uKtqLvMSNnR5TtXy1r0y1GEbtQTz UmaK0wosQk4WJ3oBsHMPs9whvE1cszlnsllydExVvtnCazUPVV9LQejV8dCOO0/OeM3X MQDylIHvV/KaTPt3AlE4jXnKYO/3XYHASffwOhvlwCPxIBxTAxXiIzs0ryKPfarlQQv6 ptEg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=r9TQwruK4xi43Ht3P7F+XNuOKrsZXqy3857WfRO8xlU=; b=fdpQMnx8jZR6YqrPEsQeMune++kgTF48CJOvyks08Lc/CVOGH8PQSZuKfcAJEK0JCf NtJ49JziD0XPTkiZfI/QcCn6N6924/tV2GZ3zaHAEwYfn6BzcObfSiwmoySQCQgKYrH4 Oll8gP3pRWXTxQ1ipdpG9Bq3PM+bKgHKJ2hZ8cKsxLItrXcdbFbHbJwzUObuL/jSCG6p 6FAH0WWMeyWF4FyNiwLmeuCVY+C5/C4CDcSfslD4FCP2lHguo+J3SrH1T6GDHgqC3RVa JEpkXjL+FJDDSkY65ODuSCbq0UQ0x7C138PbBJfYoJQOF880ne1eP6vZLwAXRRc68Z4/ Vd/A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw110ATP4hzf1ngKNamX9+KqtT+UhuAgvpTAK6ZBybL95XG+3bYMFZ WYSv59S2kSlrbw2IwEOf4HSK6mksSw==
X-Received: by 10.202.213.216 with SMTP id m207mr1049674oig.17.1500384008336; Tue, 18 Jul 2017 06:20:08 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <601C7C89-F149-4E97-A474-C128041925EA@sn3rd.com> <0956863E-7D11-47A7-BD67-5D9DB3A3574A@sn3rd.com> <CAOjisRwm=YRigbTuNSuXUAK_iQkPZnA=R8OSwHRDBGU477vzjg@mail.gmail.com> <74e61e9189db490abff8708d2bf3932f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
In-Reply-To: <74e61e9189db490abff8708d2bf3932f@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
From: Nick Sullivan <nicholas.sullivan@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 13:19:57 +0000
Message-ID: <CAOjisRz+OKHDtKedHBdy6A4UHr4U=H27szE4y=HyMayr1nsj3w@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>, Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>, "<tls@ietf.org>" <tls@ietf.org>
Cc: "lurk@ietf.org" <lurk@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113d34cad7fb590554975ff2"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lurk/ahpIldPppYAw61M1oVTB96nJpwk>
Subject: Re: [Lurk] [TLS] WG Call for adoption of draft-rescorla-tls-subcerts
X-BeenThere: lurk@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Limited Use of Remote Keys <lurk.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lurk>, <mailto:lurk-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lurk/>
List-Post: <mailto:lurk@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lurk-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lurk>, <mailto:lurk-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 13:20:10 -0000

It's a reality of the current CT system. If a crawler sees a short-lived
certificate, it will submit it to a CT log and it will be accepted.

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 2:45 PM Salz, Rich <rsalz@akamai.com>; wrote:

> > Con short-lived certs:
> > - Potentially problematic to the CT ecosystem (all certificates must be
> logged in CT, which may bloat them).
>
> That's a browser policy, not an IETF requirement, right?
>
>