Hi, all

I know this is late days and all, but something on the httpbis list got me to 
thinking about this.

Section 2.1.4 defines the "strict" directive. When present, it means that "the 
UA ... should apply to the Pinned Host the Pinning Policy expressed in the PKP 
header ... ignoring local client policy."

While the text does not say what this local policy might be, the reason for 
having this was the policy to allow locally-issued certificates to be used for 
pretty much anything. This policy accommodates TLS proxies. So if a 
security-minded bank would like to avoid interception even at the cost of being 
inaccessible from many places of business, they can use the "strict" directive. 

Now consider two devices. One is a mobile platform, could be a phone or a 
laptop, that the user carries around from home to work. The other is a desktop 
computer, that is always at work. The laptop will at some point be used at home 
to access the bank. The PKP gets noted, and from that point on, the user will 
not be able to access the bank from work. 

The desktop computer cannot note the PKP, and will always be able to connect to 
the bank. Section 2.5 says this:
   o  The UA MUST note the Pins if and only if the TLS connection was
      authenticated with a certificate chain containing at least one of
      the SPKI structures indicated by at least one of the given SPKI
      Fingerprints.

This rule is a safety rule, to avoid being injected with bogus PKPs, mostly 
through misconfiguration of the server. There are other requirements (that TLS 
be error-free) that make sure it is not done by an attacker (at least, not a 
non-trusted attacker). 

I'm wondering if we should remove this requirement from section 2.5 when the 
"strict" directive is present. IOW, should we allow noting of PKPs with the 
"strict" directive as long as the TLS connection is valid. I can see how this 
would make it easy for a TLS proxy to brick the browser, but I'm wondering what 
others think of the trade-off.

Yoav

_______________________________________________
websec mailing list
websec@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec

Reply via email to