Re: [secdir] additional mechanisms on top of the auth framework, was: SECDIR review of draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-24

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Thu, 31 October 2013 14:51 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20E2121E8092 for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 07:51:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LvHTGDI6Diiz for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 07:51:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a97.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcagg.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FF8721F9CAC for <secdir@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 07:51:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a97.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a97.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31EB828606F; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 07:51:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=cryptonector.com; bh=iC7INnbfQngs01 1wTPB6unFy3aw=; b=fQh4lsjEttzxR3XMPCeT2NpPrh8/riEhxSZHaPpiMtluxX f8Xr3KJ40rszy3ThB1EOiU1yxyw5ZIQHFbgwWVV6J+zC1Tb4BwGei5JENkSK5VGB M1ModK+hguEStLjL+Ytt3XQSLYBjUO6LbTzYPzFfsD9hCIDwHM10UNM4nVho4=
Received: from gmail.com (108-207-244-174.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net [108.207.244.174]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a97.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E6D6E286058; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 07:51:05 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 09:51:02 -0500
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
Message-ID: <20131031145059.GA29480@gmail.com>
References: <52700DE4.8020208@bbn.com> <52726125.1000802@greenbytes.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <52726125.1000802@greenbytes.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: secdir <secdir@ietf.org>, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>, fielding@gbiv.com, "Mankin, Allison" <amankin@verisign.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, mnot@pobox.com
Subject: Re: [secdir] additional mechanisms on top of the auth framework, was: SECDIR review of draft-ietf-httpbis-p7-auth-24
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 14:51:14 -0000

On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 02:54:45PM +0100, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2013-10-29 20:35, Stephen Kent wrote:
> >...
> 
> 
> OK. Maybe:
> 
> "HTTP does not restrict applications to this simple
> challenge-response framework. Additional mechanisms can be used,
> such as additional header fields carrying authentication
> information, or encryption on the transport layer in order to
> provide confidentiality. However, such additional mechanisms are not
> defined by this specification."

Or even -as pretty much all web authentication is done- *above* HTTP.

Nico
--