IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [websec] new rev: draft-ietf-websec-strict-transport-sec-08

=JeffH <Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com> Thu, 31 May 2012 18:03 UTC

Return-Path: <Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.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 D2B2421F86DE for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 May 2012 11:03:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.495
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1, 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 koltgVtRaUBI for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 May 2012 11:03:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oproxy7-pub.bluehost.com (oproxy7.bluehost.com [IPv6:2605:dc00:100:2::a7]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 177D721F86DA for <websec@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 May 2012 11:02:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 17957 invoked by uid 0); 31 May 2012 18:02:58 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO box514.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.114) by oproxy7.bluehost.com with SMTP; 31 May 2012 18:02:58 -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=woW75SHtA/YcWOWMy+gK3kT4B0joQ7GvAB+HtYd5FbQ=; b=0ViKDa+JIYqviRUfswYB2xMFvFvmugG1N9If46Au9jljK3MUaaNfZOXUmQMHykrKaSij8y/IapY1mvnCZ3rWLtdaM8ZpT7EePfXClkfcPQAvB6CbztnFNNox5qVORJAr;
Received: from [216.113.168.128] (port=54371 helo=[10.244.137.233]) by box514.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com>) id 1Sa9i5-0004dn-DC for websec@ietf.org; Thu, 31 May 2012 12:02:57 -0600
Message-ID: <4FC7B252.1010305@KingsMountain.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 11:02:58 -0700
From: =JeffH <Jeff.Hodges@KingsMountain.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1
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 216.113.168.128 authed with jeff.hodges+kingsmountain.com}
Subject: Re: [websec] new rev: draft-ietf-websec-strict-transport-sec-08
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, 31 May 2012 18:03:05 -0000

Alexey said:
 >
 > Most of my issues were addressed in the latest version, except for this one:
 >
 >  > 6.1.  Strict-Transport-Security HTTP Response Header Field
 >  >
 >  > 4.  UAs MUST ignore any STS header fields containing directives, or
 >  >      other header field value data, that does not conform to the
 >  >      syntax defined in this specification.
 >
 > So this is saying that syntactically invalid STS header fields are
 > to be ignored. This still doesn't say if unrecognized directives are to
 > be ignored or not. (Because they can comply with the generic syntax for
 > directives, so they would be syntactically valid, albeit unrecognized).
 > So can you please add an explicit sentence about that?

will do.

=JeffH

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email