Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax redux
Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com> Thu, 29 December 2011 21:45 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf@adambarth.com>
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 4012721F8BB2 for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 13:45:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 lslGrgr3cMVB for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 13:45:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-gx0-f172.google.com (mail-gx0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA9B521F8BB0 for <websec@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 13:45:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ggnk5 with SMTP id k5so9795790ggn.31 for <websec@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 13:45:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.236.148.235 with SMTP id v71mr50298756yhj.6.1325195135326; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 13:45:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-tul01m020-f172.google.com (mail-tul01m020-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 9sm87304237any.3.2011.12.29.13.45.34 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 29 Dec 2011 13:45:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by obcuz6 with SMTP id uz6so11132088obc.31 for <websec@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 13:45:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.50.191.225 with SMTP id hb1mr43073763igc.17.1325195134121; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 13:45:34 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.62.139 with HTTP; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 13:45:03 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4EFCDDD5.6040005@gmx.de>
References: <4EAB66B3.4090404@KingsMountain.com> <4EABB25E.9000900@gmx.de> <4EFC5F7B.7050304@gmx.de> <CAJE5ia_HhenArVey=5-ttLqh4-vbBE01TFZKuzAmAtHQJQJ3kQ@mail.gmail.com> <4EFCD7E4.5060507@gmx.de> <CAJE5ia-w47HHhnTBAE_PMApAAdCu=6PJexaaoJO0MZ23Ae-vcw@mail.gmail.com> <4EFCDA9C.90308@gmx.de> <CAJE5ia-E1nhN1YGV6uy3uEq4oboQowDm4FboKbWV1kunHQmXPw@mail.gmail.com> <4EFCDDD5.6040005@gmx.de>
From: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 13:45:03 -0800
Message-ID: <CAJE5ia8CL9ozRJgRNCdu6XwVT0paVuVUreB12f-BiMvH+wiq6A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: IETF WebSec WG <websec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax redux
X-BeenThere: websec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
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: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 21:45:36 -0000
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > On 2011-12-29 22:32, Adam Barth wrote: >> >> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Julian Reschke<julian.reschke@gmx.de> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 2011-12-29 22:18, Adam Barth wrote: >>>> >>>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Julian Reschke<julian.reschke@gmx.de> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 2011-12-29 20:50, Adam Barth wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> As I wrote before, I don't think we should include quoted-string in >>>>>> the grammar. As far as I know, no one has implemented it and I have >>>>>> no plans to implement quoted-string in Chrome. Having quoted-string >>>>>> in the grammar only leads to pain., >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It would be helpful if you were more precise on the pain it causes, >>>>> considering you need to process extension directives anyway... >>>> >>>> >>>> We've been over this several times before. The problem is the >>>> requirement to balance DQUOTE and the complexities surrounding the >>>> error conditions if the DQUOTEs don't balance properly (including >>>> escaping). >>> >>> >>> Yes, but you are avoiding the question I asked. Are you implementing >>> quoted-string for extension parameters? >> >> >> No. >> >> Here's the grammar I recommend: >> >> Strict-Transport-Security = "Strict-Transport-Security" ":" >> directive *( ";" [ directive ] ) >> >> directive = max-age | includeSubDomains | STS-d-ext >> max-age = "max-age" "=" delta-seconds >> includeSubDomains = "includeSubDomains" >> STS-d-ext = token [ "=" token ] >> >> I would also define the precise requirements for parsing all possible >> input sequences, but I understand that's not fashionable. > > Ack. This is at least consistent. > > That being said, I disagree. token=quoted-string is widely implemented, and > if there are clients not getting it right we should fix them. > > If you are aware of specific clients having this problem please list them so > we can open bug reports. Chrome does not (and will not) implement quoted-string for the STS header for the reasons I've explained previously. You're welcome to file bugs, but I'm just going to close them WONTFIX. Adam
- [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax redux Ryan Sleevi
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… =JeffH
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax redux =JeffH
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… =JeffH
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… =JeffH
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… =JeffH
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Roy T. Fielding
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Tobias Gondrom
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Anne van Kesteren
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Anne van Kesteren
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Anne van Kesteren
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Adam Barth
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Marsh Ray
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Julian Reschke
- Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax red… Bjoern Hoehrmann