Re: [websec] #55: Clarify that the newest pinning information takes precedence

Chris Palmer <palmer@google.com> Fri, 19 October 2012 21:47 UTC

Return-Path: <palmer@google.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 72C2A21F87DD for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:47:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gEzsSUT5b2yH for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:47:50 -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 82B5121F894B for <websec@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:47:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lb0-f172.google.com with SMTP id k13so717041lbo.31 for <websec@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:47:49 -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 :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-system-of-record; bh=tO8iWNBQXLNqde7PvG5TJfzVNydPjEJteXlXuN1hUb8=; b=WxNdYyIce9YIpSSj9CxvItyaKySySqb4pfBZcl3uaLXb/W7drFwGS1s8JUVgOhFvQd 9Sx1EZcnZlsii77iimRe/xSHnI8/ljY2xUs1lodblHfyV3g/0WIly4Qyjwf0LrsQOLqi t5QJfjeCN6VXgPcMZaSU6wmyM1qJnx+ZhNObSmD2tUlV+Ko5T4P1Kv2gwqLaotaweWt+ +++DIupJhp7c/ixe4hl7JwyrS4L6mu7xLdHA66TnxKk81Bv7tdhnUwIWN3vUEuZBiGOm fuAMBFFQjQfbW/uSW5W4haXVoSyRdgo12+XmwllJ/DkbW1byekYQMgIE4Ihs9YGtf6SR F6Og==
X-Google-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 :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-system-of-record :x-gm-message-state; bh=tO8iWNBQXLNqde7PvG5TJfzVNydPjEJteXlXuN1hUb8=; b=dIn74rP84zmGuyVWAmDD7yknEWpfOSg9BF4mT22zZk2wIWR63K7tgE0+BlOnzlf0Ze Q5iIk58dci5n8UWx8ofatWyyL5vLPpuAXh64eHZzpJP+OTqfqDHaJ5YpkfSVvGyV4h32 OzKa8xYfbev3emwj/KjZPFeKYOeezPEdVL3YJ1dHuDeTUTw+7HhsNeNU+oo5OnwnuaEI e2e8YJqe0O4lIrtr1kz5JUXjhvyiJarZjQNsc78lvnUgItxa+bjUMmdH5IiiKBc9RB4M bBmhrh6qaQBPIVrQaV/Asxir1YtzQibBSKfbSjIbkmVpoywYAir2tVIsMY0su5Ov7coZ 682Q==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.152.110.74 with SMTP id hy10mr2184650lab.54.1350683269476; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:47:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.39.226 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:47:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <058.106749b7ec8d8775c9a7c03ff71b6de4@trac.tools.ietf.org>
References: <058.106749b7ec8d8775c9a7c03ff71b6de4@trac.tools.ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:47:49 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOuvq21sNEQRfHvrQc1F5BmVFXuyH+3htiY4Hr+C9Z1f=z4ZDQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Chris Palmer <palmer@google.com>
To: IETF WebSec WG <websec@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-System-Of-Record: true
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnlg1oCb3rkoYoP6k63+j+Ym3U9WLbsOTQmF6iuFVBoJJZj3/N4wvUOs6mNqE5ZVGzMNrCFGblUr8on0UoWiLa+anqWUbb0e3elLuzaJjBqJUmqe5PKY17dF1Ll2cwHbrsPljGn8uPOGOSXRkVfTAN/rSF21i/m2BGmvvLy6DUGvYhy+XAO+D8lTfcD9l2FsxE4AEOU
Subject: Re: [websec] #55: Clarify that the newest pinning information takes precedence
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, 19 Oct 2012 21:47:51 -0000

Any thoughts on this text?


On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:33 PM, websec issue tracker
<trac+websec@trac.tools.ietf.org> wrote:
> #55: Clarify that the newest pinning information takes precedence
>
>  In section "Interactions With Preloaded Pin Lists", we need to specify
>  that the newest information, even "stop pinning", must take precedence. I
>  propose this text:
>
>  UAs MUST use the newest information — built-in or set via Valid Pinning
>  Header — when performing Pin Validation for the host. If the result of
>  noting a Valid Pinning Header is to disable pinning for the host (such as
>  because the host set a max-age directive with a value of 0), UAs MUST
>  allow this new  nformation to override any built-in pins. That is, a host
>  must be able to un-pin itself even from built-in pins.