IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Tom Ritter <tom@ritter.vg> Tue, 26 August 2014 21:42 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@ritter.vg>
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 A03571A0118 for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 14:42:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.379
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.379 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 n0L-56KJUQ7O for <websec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 14:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-x231.google.com (mail-ie0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A09471A0113 for <websec@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 14:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f177.google.com with SMTP id at20so11766517iec.8 for <websec@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 14:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ritter.vg; s=vg; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=pWTkMhFcqVum94s1+DRXW7pjvI/8xp4PQaMBjciByhc=; b=OvdFLzS+qR4HVYxTWZXWlxk6vZfgvgqtxHJ5F0GhyFSxbWFblyFtnyzP9s42b57mvp vlmxIKmG+ag30mEey2QbvUGVLLKd4RYjbKojc2jIscQoZJ3nHS+zYi53sRhHV96B5HR+ mguAmvkSpU91i9ezYQQ+j/f5Jkxfp5X7GhzNA=
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:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=pWTkMhFcqVum94s1+DRXW7pjvI/8xp4PQaMBjciByhc=; b=MRzP92oWx/xP9LquWAnjgFDssVbQMnxvw6Aun4016wGI3CbGpY9fyK1YsDQN16kGBM i9ziZxSYZ+bQmxWUM9AOA4Gc+zuwlxzY2xUQ7GFp0VMOQ6k3r4KxEZfsX9QSQqaSjo1e +QS3v7NtfS8ceKquYboN8ZaIuwjBfQV2u9IyADHRW+Gv0PlKPH2clvUgtP8+is6DC5zS tfFrO0foeXcLxrXCLk+43883st0/yGvY1mteT3ilafOK6t5J+dtnNSqfflk2P+Vk1Fch 1l8596YSYZQDDxVEQ2XIX1vQUh2gGkZoKUX6Q5HW+4HtSGoKFAPW+G1vnCUG4TXae7OH uDaw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkKWm10u5MzPYPoI/nGI06KifEIA+xXkcQBVrYhXJOD5uEBecGfhjsEkKy/4ASxXtxt7yDd
X-Received: by 10.42.216.198 with SMTP id hj6mr10155164icb.65.1409089369100; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 14:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.107.10.104 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 14:42:29 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ8ZG3KUPAbePp-_GCztj4RSLd8MuNo1iDz=ua+BEjQVzJc7Q@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>
From: Tom Ritter <tom@ritter.vg>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 16:42:29 -0500
Message-ID: <CA+cU71=A6vFXZrG8mcqj4uC-z2VdJfFOutqcq9MPTYs+uhpa9Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Trevor Perrin <trevp@trevp.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/websec/kITkWQxCVXGuew384hLAPBRG89I
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 21:42:50 -0000

On 26 August 2014 16:38, Trevor Perrin <trevp@trevp.net> 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.

-tom

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email