[websec] default value for max-age ? (was: Re: Strict-Transport-Security syntax redux)

=JeffH <Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com> Mon, 02 January 2012 23:29 UTC

Return-Path: <Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com>
X-Original-To: websec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: websec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFD611F0C56 for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Jan 2012 15:29:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.52
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.745, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qh6xvoGnO+J4 for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Jan 2012 15:29:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from oproxy4-pub.bluehost.com (oproxy4-pub.bluehost.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 34F871F0C4D for <websec@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Jan 2012 15:29:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 3338 invoked by uid 0); 2 Jan 2012 23:29:21 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO box514.bluehost.com) ( by cpoproxy1.bluehost.com with SMTP; 2 Jan 2012 23:29:21 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kingsmountain.com; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Subject:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=w5uftk6SP/XgunPlNogUr+FSQ0sgzZS56QKejc+Jcxg=; b=7H1mX5lUeUsxKPg4ilg8yC2DXVemSi4n56QWUQnJIYEnDH1AIGk2XVsRLS5tgGCJGSrE5jdMfXefJlG4UJxokn5MCY8vGFjkiKadB+dHByppoWBLPguMn/OQSd1DsS3s;
Received: from c-24-4-122-173.hsd1.ca.comcast.net ([] helo=[]) by box514.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com>) id 1RhrJh-0004qX-N9 for websec@ietf.org; Mon, 02 Jan 2012 16:29:21 -0700
Message-ID: <4F023DD0.8060308@KingsMountain.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2012 15:29:20 -0800
From: =JeffH <Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20111108 Thunderbird/3.1.16
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: IETF WebSec WG <websec@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Identified-User: {11025:box514.bluehost.com:kingsmou:kingsmountain.com} {sentby:smtp auth authed with jeff.hodges+kingsmountain.com}
Subject: [websec] default value for max-age ? (was: Re: 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: Mon, 02 Jan 2012 23:29:46 -0000

Julian wondered..
 > wouldn't it make sense to have a default for max-age so it
 > can be made OPTIONAL?

hm ... I lean towards keeping max-age as REQUIRED (without a default value) and 
thus hopefully encouraging deployers to think a bit about this and its 
ramifications, and also because its value is so site-specific in terms of a web 
application's needs, deployment approach, and tolerance for downside risk of 
breaking itself.