IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [websec] wrt "breaking pins" aka "un-pinning" (breakv, breakc directives; draft-evans-palmer-hsts-pinning-00)

Marsh Ray <marsh@extendedsubset.com> Mon, 17 October 2011 22:53 UTC

Return-Path: <marsh@extendedsubset.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 12D9C1F0C49 for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:53:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 QbnGDUGJUBiY for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:53:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org (mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org [204.13.248.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB7161F0C43 for <websec@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:53:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xs01.extendedsubset.com ([69.164.193.58]) by mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <marsh@extendedsubset.com>) id 1RFw4A-000PUa-9C; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:53:54 +0000
Received: from [192.168.1.15] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xs01.extendedsubset.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D20B263BF; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:53:52 +0000 (UTC)
X-Mail-Handler: MailHop Outbound by DynDNS
X-Originating-IP: 69.164.193.58
X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/mailhop/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information)
X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX19KXsQre9rTjZD8lKd1+Vg2hMB7PlLE/l8=
Message-ID: <4E9CB1FF.5050407@extendedsubset.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:53:51 -0500
From: Marsh Ray <marsh@extendedsubset.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110921 Thunderbird/3.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Chris Palmer <palmer@google.com>
References: <4E9CA78C.5050805@KingsMountain.com> <CAOuvq20WgodTnW9sfbBHbvzUuwuae1H=+uzzYnne2p20wp43+g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOuvq20WgodTnW9sfbBHbvzUuwuae1H=+uzzYnne2p20wp43+g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Chris Evans <cevans@google.com>, IETF WebSec WG <websec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [websec] wrt "breaking pins" aka "un-pinning" (breakv, breakc directives; draft-evans-palmer-hsts-pinning-00)
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, 17 Oct 2011 22:53:56 -0000

On 10/17/2011 05:21 PM, Chris Palmer wrote:
>
> Your average sys admin is more comfortable telling Apache to send a
> particular header with particular text than wrangling openssl(1) to
> add various extensions to a certificate.

My understanding is that most people just generate their certs directly
using their CA's web interface and download the result.

On one hand this would suggest that admins will be ill-prepared to set
custom x509 extensions. On the other, we may find that CAs are quite 
receptive to new features which support pinning customers to
themselves.

- Marsh

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email