Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-cdmi-mediatypes

Tom Yu <tlyu@MIT.EDU> Fri, 10 December 2010 18:32 UTC

Return-Path: <tlyu@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3260728C10A; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 10:32:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.758
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.758 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.841, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id URElBssXxsVx; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 10:32:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (DMZ-MAILSEC-SCANNER-7.MIT.EDU [18.7.68.36]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A436128C100; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 10:32:15 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: 12074424-b7b0bae000000a05-7c-4d02728b553a
Received: from mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu ( [18.7.62.39]) by dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (Symantec Brightmail Gateway) with SMTP id 07.8A.02565.B82720D4; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 13:33:47 -0500 (EST)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH.MIT.EDU [18.7.22.103]) by mailhub-auth-4.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id oBAIXk0G029284; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 13:33:46 -0500
Received: from cathode-dark-space.mit.edu (CATHODE-DARK-SPACE.MIT.EDU [18.18.1.96]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as tlyu@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.12.4) with ESMTP id oBAIXjgk028872 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 10 Dec 2010 13:33:46 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from tlyu@localhost) by cathode-dark-space.mit.edu (8.12.9.20060308) id oBAIXjKk003286; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 13:33:45 -0500 (EST)
To: "Krishna Sankar (ksankar)" <ksankar@cisco.com>
References: <ldvlj3y2qdh.fsf@cathode-dark-space.mit.edu> <9FA16888AD1BF64ABCE6C2532CCEB98A0C9AFD44@xmb-sjc-219.amer.cisco.com>
From: Tom Yu <tlyu@MIT.EDU>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 13:33:44 -0500
In-Reply-To: <9FA16888AD1BF64ABCE6C2532CCEB98A0C9AFD44@xmb-sjc-219.amer.cisco.com> (Krishna Sankar's message of "Thu, 9 Dec 2010 21:04:52 -0800")
Message-ID: <ldvzksd1nqv.fsf@cathode-dark-space.mit.edu>
Lines: 14
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Cc: draft-cdmi-mediatypes.all@tools.ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-cdmi-mediatypes
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 18:32:17 -0000

"Krishna Sankar (ksankar)" <ksankar@cisco.com> writes:

> Tom,
> 	The security considerations in RFC 4627 pertains to JavaScript
> and security pertaining to scripting languages. We are not using
> JavaScript in CDMI and so that section is not relevant here.
> Cheers
> <k/>

Section 3.1 of your document says that the CDMI interface represents
CDMI objects in JSON format.  If some element of some CDMI
implementation is written (perhaps ill-advisedly) in JavaScript and
chooses to use eval() to parse the JSON encoding, then I believe the
Security Considerations of RFC 4627 would apply.