IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [websec] draft-ietf-websec-key-pinning

Chris Palmer <palmer@google.com> Tue, 26 August 2014 22:10 UTC

Return-Path: <palmer@google.com>
X-Original-To: websec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: websec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55D101A00F8 for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:10:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.047
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.047 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ev_sK86iVylh for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:10:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qa0-x22e.google.com (mail-qa0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D9181A01A9 for <websec@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:10:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id v10so14342402qac.19 for <websec@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:10:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=ZlsDXKm2Jrn4B8JNmBX/ELa+r6cxMf9Fcl1QpSpM7no=; b=WBnoZxDOepnsc0GfFLufy7lY9HRCsbbFAW7Az24OqLW18+ppHrZp/rvqNK7ZUo7ytr zvzmfXdQ6LO5v/f0NZygg2CHoOjMQW+4AC4bLK2k8IsD5HFsrVOQJxYSQ94KU+Kwolk/ dOlRHjYZeVUiktoSCqqQW0Kfu1eaqtWce3i11ZlfJxJJKrWqhGO05QdD0uhFYAUVfckO LxBaInihwZJUr8McYCut/NqhyC6opvkL5Y7r+lmj/569hn4UG2nA3TNn0NOSncX8WHXO w414dWr/J+rUC2vVa46nGsMhWZ3aDgtufjM/OVTfbTVxcPJVsbDKAR1O69uwC1X4VGN6 Ja9g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=ZlsDXKm2Jrn4B8JNmBX/ELa+r6cxMf9Fcl1QpSpM7no=; b=lzy03x83yxwsiiAhUa8Sdmne+l6DCueeqm0tN1tzNXU7GYa9gBYO3OROmCIR+B5ZqS xejFiYRKvcBj6ZhFXwme/RSdpvW/nsbSWd/tUbwRI218LmU/iYvAZucg42SVfVQflycJ 20suDrkW+VB/CIjDfs9QV6SjmvzGhbdtzfMh325MRlzw+TPawapVyxAE+Zyu6hb7B8CL V/i7AEPvwI3LTyQ3RLV9fm449dA2HNlDO1upwd5ZkHx+YhKBXcx12xuhcP3gAYyJec+D dxKbbOg/b6Qt4IE4VlFx61z6ib66hkmEhSzfk5nY5zooYmzeGcuwft5qE8vlgDzkGpJC ZTww==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl0CVkE3PNjp8R2wy6SXN/w59WS4d0yuaz0rgIQsfE7NMKJ4ZgGuXltHyF9s+AVmc30vssU
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.224.79.13 with SMTP id n13mr51539714qak.79.1409091025367; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:10:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.165.2 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:10:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+cU71=A6vFXZrG8mcqj4uC-z2VdJfFOutqcq9MPTYs+uhpa9Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BAY169-DS62B5941BF0A9024964BB0AEEE0@phx.gbl> <CACvaWvYHAmpX0f9_m-sckhWz9tcyWA-sxVR4vP-A5UcAQmnYXA@mail.gmail.com> <BAY169-DS45F1C5036AB09CA44D0BC7AEDF0@phx.gbl> <CA+cU71k-pLD315dzfd_c74QM51c7V2VQkZ26PiXUTqntmESD=A@mail.gmail.com> <CAOuvq20mZkScvPDKjsa1eZ6rdoHxf_+oF=gpaOcvkOTaYhyj6Q@mail.gmail.com> <CA+cU71mW47OvqRNTbw-H7u-F_k6hMv4xr0XcMYAS_V6eE8brwA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOuvq20C+T9Ejf_KUsfPRtUWL7ggCF0UWJZkGr5xGBEkERXeRQ@mail.gmail.com> <BAY169-DS45D73636AA204DEEABC876AEDC0@phx.gbl> <CAOuvq20kCKk=jcXsy_d8C-4Fn-f0zshP6YUPn5N8hsKt7KO7dw@mail.gmail.com> <CAGZ8ZG3KUPAbePp-_GCztj4RSLd8MuNo1iDz=ua+BEjQVzJc7Q@mail.gmail.com> <CA+cU71=A6vFXZrG8mcqj4uC-z2VdJfFOutqcq9MPTYs+uhpa9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:10:25 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOuvq22QgGVpsxrsZswqspiP-rgNE6B3vp_6bYDTE5-MrLZdVg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Chris Palmer <palmer@google.com>
To: Tom Ritter <tom@ritter.vg>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/websec/WDT0Cea6plWla_KgEhQ9O74sbXE
Cc: "draft-ietf-websec-key-pinning@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-websec-key-pinning@tools.ietf.org>, Eric Lawrence <ericlaw1979@hotmail.com>, IETF WebSec WG <websec@ietf.org>, Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
Subject: Re: [websec] draft-ietf-websec-key-pinning
X-BeenThere: websec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 26 Aug 2014 22:10:27 -0000

On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Tom Ritter <tom@ritter.vg> wrote:

>> That's not completely true, because PKP affects Pin Validation of
>> other connections, and PKP-RO doesn't.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> So Eric's point is valid: PKP-RO doesn't provide an administrator much
>> confidence that their site is ready for PKP, and might even mislead
>> them.
>
> This is especially true if includeSubdomains is enabled. It'd be
> common for that directive to apply to hosts that the -RO header would
> not be included on. In PKP-RO, it would not be applied to them; in PKP
> it would.

OK, so, what do you want?

Is it even possible for me to write text you would accept?

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status