Re: [websec] handling STS header field extendability

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Tue, 14 August 2012 04:13 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.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 641C721F8627 for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 21:13:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.018
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.018 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.042, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-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 Z2m2dfHwVAG0 for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 21:13:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-f172.google.com (mail-lb0-f172.google.com [209.85.217.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 884AF21F86C5 for <websec@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 21:13:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lbbgg6 with SMTP id gg6so16526lbb.31 for <websec@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 21:13:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=MQUq4lSReMJXS5vCNPvnMLgir+3I/T9SHbSABQk1IVc=; b=I0jy+CznnMMebTSPjOdAHPvmamVmHH8xaM1H2hHM4VMYbLdUwRFeemwSfY8ZkM0v7D lXV2rK5KAq08YddMjKJLli4sD/aJYz9702CWNQcPMNiJYkJ+oDFwofa0V9izVRnmgO/3 35En1UhHbsnB2twa4mHlbBT5aO4ywUu3ibOxWCqu0dxhyq0zLWYtzoh1dOxLbIkdXXJP VQqbHp1gdJ1PnYBrUJs5rJQV4MkID+/N2NKZvrwELb9pNDt1UKQMWBSdRfOidLiEJzKt /15O6y4twzZdP/trlEP8c2sUOgFML5ZuUOzlLv1WOALqV52t88raN2ZMUexW002JZNn2 byDQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.152.114.3 with SMTP id jc3mr10863575lab.11.1344917615510; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 21:13:35 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com
Received: by 10.112.113.196 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 21:13:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAOuvq23dxoKyV2No55WEYePhVj+Fcab5cF65C1FsiqgtmEkXMA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5024352D.4040604@KingsMountain.com> <CAOuvq23dxoKyV2No55WEYePhVj+Fcab5cF65C1FsiqgtmEkXMA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 00:13:35 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: FDY9NooTLF9Jh4un5OfHfZYTllY
Message-ID: <CAC4RtVCrfqi=7CfWsWLoQyQRuvGHj4hKAWQt8Pz3zHiiD4n4Cg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
To: IETF WebSec WG <websec@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04088c7fb9851e04c7320871
Subject: Re: [websec] handling STS header field extendability
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: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 04:13:37 -0000

>
> Please forgive my ignorance, but do LockCA and/or LockEV offer any
> functionality that you can't already get with public key pinning as
> currently specified?
>

 Folks, this thread has rather been hijacked.  We need to have some WG
input on what registration policy to recommend for a possible future STS
header field registry.  That's what this thread is for, and I need to see
some WG discussion about it in order that Jeff may finish the document and
that I may move it forward.

Please take discussion of LockCA and LockEV to another thread.

Thanks,
Barry