Re: [websec] [HSTS] Contradiction between sections 8.1 and 11.3 of RFC 6797?

2014-12-30 Thread Daniel Kahn Gillmor
On 12/17/2014 03:38 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 11:51:08AM -0800, > David Keeler wrote > a message of 47 lines which said: > >> Section 11.3 is about when the user agent connects to a host that it >> previously noted as using HSTS. > > OK, so a example case with s

Re: [websec] [HSTS] Contradiction between sections 8.1 and 11.3 of RFC 6797?

2014-12-25 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 11:51:08AM -0800, David Keeler wrote a message of 47 lines which said: > Section 11.3 is about when the user agent connects to a host that it > previously noted as using HSTS. OK, so a example case with section 11.3 could be a server publishing a HSTS header while it h

Re: [websec] [HSTS] Contradiction between sections 8.1 and 11.3 of RFC 6797?

2014-12-17 Thread David Keeler
Hi Stephane, Here's how I look at it: Section 8.1 is about a user agent noting a new HSTS host. If the connection had an underlying error (e.g. self-signed cert), the user agent will not note that host as using HSTS. Section 11.3 is about when the user agent connects to a host that it previously

[websec] [HSTS] Contradiction between sections 8.1 and 11.3 of RFC 6797?

2014-12-17 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
[I'm not subscribed to the websec working group so please copy me when replying.] I don't know how to read section 11.3 of RFC 6797. It says "If all four of the following conditions are true... [self-signed certificates...] ...then secure connections to that site will fail, per the HSTS design."