Re: [websec] Strict-Transport-Security syntax redux

Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com> Fri, 30 December 2011 01:22 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 E69341F0C5A for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:22:46 -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=[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 D4-Di9sqgl32 for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:22:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 567341F0C4A for <websec@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:22:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by iabz21 with SMTP id z21so2633842iab.31 for <websec@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:22:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.50.155.195 with SMTP id vy3mr43444615igb.12.1325208165900; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:22:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id aq5sm82472839igc.5.2011.12.29.17.22.44 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:22:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by iabz21 with SMTP id z21so2633818iab.31 for <websec@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:22:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.42.148.1 with SMTP id p1mr1350881icv.27.1325208164104; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:22:44 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.62.139 with HTTP; Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:22:13 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4EFD0D7D.7040908@KingsMountain.com>
References: <4EFD0D7D.7040908@KingsMountain.com>
From: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:22:13 -0800
Message-ID: <CAJE5ia8L4UV-06JXVXZ1KuHd9hg=0KoaqxSX3W7RSwoCE8tQTA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "=JeffH" <Jeff.Hodges@kingsmountain.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
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: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 01:22:47 -0000

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 5:01 PM, =JeffH <Jeff.Hodges@kingsmountain.com> wrote:
> Adam Barth noted:
>> I would also define the precise requirements for parsing all possible
>> input sequences, but I understand that's not fashionable.
>
> By that, you are suggesting specification of parsing algorithms as done in
> RFC6265 "HTTP State Management Mechanism", yes?

I actually think what we're doing for CSP is slightly better:

http://www.w3.org/TR/CSP/#policies

Adam