authmeth - StartTLS security consideration
"Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email protected]> Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:24:01 -0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ldapbis |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
In respect to the following text: Clients SHOULD by default either warn the user when the security level achieved does not provide an acceptable level of data confidentiality and/or data integrity protection, or be configured to refuse to proceed without an acceptable level of security. the IESG basically asked "under what circumstances would it be acceptable for a client, by default, to proceed without any warning with an unacceptable level of security", if none, the SHOULD ought to be a MUST. Though I noted that one such circumstance is where it is possible, through subsequent protocol exchanges (e.g., SASL), to achieve an acceptable level of security. However, I didn't see the MUST precluding this. I personally have no problem with keeping this a SHOULD if someone can come up with acceptable text that provides a reasonable circumstance where not following the recommendation would be appropriate. I also noted that second half of this text appears to place a SHOULD upon the user (or admin) and not the implementor. The RFC 2830 text: Clients SHOULD either warn the user when the security level achieved does not provide confidentiality and/or integrity protection, or be configurable to refuse to proceed without an acceptable level of security. is better in this regard. I believe it was rewritten to imply that the default configuration should be to 'refuse to proceed' or 'warn'. Considering all of the above, the following replacement text is offered for WG consideration. Clients MUST by default either warn the user when the security level achieved does not provide an acceptable level of data confidentiality and/or data integrity protection, or refuse to proceed without an acceptable level of security. This requirement is not intended to preclude a client from attempting to achieve an acceptable level of security via other means (e.g., SASL), or combination of means. Please provide comment as soon as possible so appropriate direction can be provided to the Editor by week's end.