Re: [xmpp] IQ Handling vulnerabilities

Ashley Ward <ashley.ward@surevine.com> Mon, 10 February 2014 16:48 UTC

Return-Path: <ashley.ward@surevine.com>
X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF1281A06F1 for <xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 08:48:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 59zDyJdb52i2 for <xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 08:48:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com (mail-wg0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9387D1A06E5 for <xmpp@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 08:48:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wg0-f44.google.com with SMTP id l18so4303056wgh.11 for <xmpp@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 08:48:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-type:message-id:mime-version :subject:date:references:to:in-reply-to; bh=d53A9Oj0D+6jQQf7YtwV95W9FQnvseJ1lleA1SbglSM=; b=HUJf4Ng+1JnsDZM6R3A02vUDUmCf9BB1kySNDySKPWCOj+WOJs8IhAdKiLn7s7yu8R zzPDQ5hrRuzwURbXNQ5Gpd4hwjlU0iSqO0NZpZYxG5QPkRQXwJUvGJmxqes/7PHgVaVV j+ZCOMX3d3/jxZwKYn5PvpsZ0sYsdJEekLq6djEQJugpyG5t4uA5KQL2dJjBMCU8zJXl rGoEL+XajrUBkyyg9ZwagkjyvZsHjUfXe62zYUSJRLXTBZ86ARmzvdDw/K8tTuHf8D3S icUHE414OTwr9BywTo8mUEJGZ9Pfb2ANXr2uetTfNqRUDEFo4ClVMdB5/b4zCiz97fa3 y+zg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk1TZUEPqm6UgAG6QX+gphrsOfiuNBAWcx8Ea19PMeOxGJquAovexoi8+LDD4f+hXiygQW3
X-Received: by 10.194.192.233 with SMTP id hj9mr391231wjc.78.1392050889965; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 08:48:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.0.11] (host86-129-24-95.range86-129.btcentralplus.com. [86.129.24.95]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id r1sm38026889wia.5.2014.02.10.08.48.06 for <xmpp@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 10 Feb 2014 08:48:07 -0800 (PST)
From: Ashley Ward <ashley.ward@surevine.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_36008790-D6A5-469C-A913-6D444D8BB7E1"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1
Message-Id: <08A4B13D-00C3-4EC7-9CE1-C6F4933B2366@surevine.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 16:48:05 +0000
References: <CAOb_FnxS-dMT85N7LHj5M9JWk3pL85=ugrDqaT7j5d28HBr0Cw@mail.gmail.com> <CF194491.38AD3%jhildebr@cisco.com> <2F5E925F-021D-408E-91D9-3CC5BEB6BEC6@nostrum.com> <48F4D361-4403-47E6-862D-FBDDDEBCC642@xnyhps.nl> <CF1A369C.38BE2%jhildebr@cisco.com> <CAKHUCzyCwKbmnUoXLHW=XzYbiFrcg-dQsDojGUnA-_r3qK+_Vg@mail.gmail.com> <12420410-2615-4A32-8998-AFF19D4EF7BC@xnyhps.nl> <CAKHUCzw6r4vZOHmLm62YgQAj72EjiXbqc8ZShC4=pJ5gxff31w@mail.gmail.com> <CAOb_FnybyUd69ayMPiLZd1i1n4=cnPA6NB-d3BqguSRH3cJLtA@mail.gmail.com> <A5EDDD45-EADA-43D8-B1C8-80C72F1C4AAC@xnyhps.nl> <AF865786-93A0-4B77-AAE9-34A40DC72181@surevine.com> <52F9007F.3010108@stpeter.im>
To: XMPP Working Group <xmpp@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <52F9007F.3010108@stpeter.im>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Subject: Re: [xmpp] IQ Handling vulnerabilities
X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: XMPP Working Group <xmpp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/xmpp/>
List-Post: <mailto:xmpp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 16:48:12 -0000

On 10 Feb 2014, at 16:38, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> wrote:
> On 2/10/14, 6:05 AM, Ashley Ward wrote:
>> On 10 Feb 2014, at 12:12, Thijs Alkemade <thijs@xnyhps.nl> wrote:
>>> I’ve submitted an I-D about this issue here, to help discussion at IETF 89:
>>> 
>>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-alkemade-xmpp-iq-validation/
>> 
>> Just wondering if it's possible to use a stronger section title than “Recommendations”, or is that standard IETF I-D heading wording?
> 
> We can call it whatever we want. :-)

Cool. The only thing I was thinking is that “Recommendation” already has a meaning in this context, but there’s actually some important MUSTs in there.

Saying that I can’t think of a good alternative title though!

—
Ash