[websec] #35: HSTS spec could be more clear about UA behavior behind proxies
"websec issue tracker" <trac+websec@trac.tools.ietf.org> Fri, 20 January 2012 23:37 UTC
Return-Path: <trac+websec@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: websec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: websec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E352621F8565 for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:37:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 MrIfgGLXsxPh for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:37:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gamay.tools.ietf.org (gamay.tools.ietf.org [208.66.40.242]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 451C721F84EE for <websec@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:37:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=gamay.tools.ietf.org) by gamay.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from <trac+websec@trac.tools.ietf.org>) id 1RoO1I-0001O6-0F; Fri, 20 Jan 2012 18:37:20 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: websec issue tracker <trac+websec@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.12.2
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.2, by Edgewall Software
To: draft-ietf-websec-strict-transport-sec@tools.ietf.org, jeff.hodges@kingsmountain.com
X-Trac-Project: websec
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 23:37:19 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/websec/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/wg/websec/trac/ticket/35
Message-ID: <070.f70ee4d09481ba2840593de66b0fd5f4@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 35
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: draft-ietf-websec-strict-transport-sec@tools.ietf.org, jeff.hodges@kingsmountain.com, websec@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+websec@trac.tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on gamay.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Resent-To:
Resent-Message-Id: <20120120233742.451C721F84EE@ietfa.amsl.com>
Resent-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:37:41 -0800
Resent-From: trac+websec@trac.tools.ietf.org
Cc: websec@ietf.org
Subject: [websec] #35: HSTS spec could be more clear about UA behavior behind proxies
X-BeenThere: websec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
List-Id: Web Application Security Minus Authentication and Transport <websec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/websec>, <mailto:websec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/websec>
List-Post: <mailto:websec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:websec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec>, <mailto:websec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 23:37:45 -0000
#35: HSTS spec could be more clear about UA behavior behind proxies
UA won't note a well-behaving but unknown HSTS Host as an HSTS Host if the
UA is behind a proxy such that secure transport warnings/errors exist.
overall behavior and design rationale could be better explained in spec.
--
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: | Owner: draft-ietf-websec-strict-transport-
jeff.hodges@… | sec@…
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone:
Component: strict- | Version:
transport-sec | Keywords:
Severity: Active WG |
Document |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Ticket URL: <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/wg/websec/trac/ticket/35>
websec <http://tools.ietf.org/websec/>
- [websec] #35: HSTS spec could be more clear about… websec issue tracker
- Re: [websec] #35: HSTS spec could be more clear a… websec issue tracker