- From: Daniel W. Connolly <connolly@hal.com>
- Date: Mon, 09 Jan 1995 13:49:54 -0600
- To: www-talk@info.cern.ch, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
I just read a very interesting proposal: From: "Electronic Commerce Standards for the WWW (Spyglass)" http://www.spyglass.com/techreport/stdsec.htm Tue Dec 6 21:54:52 1994 |Simple Authentication - OPTIONAL | |This scheme, proposed by Spyglass, uses a random challenge sent from |the server to the client. The client encodes the random challenge |using the user's password as an encryption key in order to establish |authentication. See Note B for a full specification. | |This method is currently indicated as OPTIONAL, but Spyglass believes |that it should become REQUIRED for HTTP compliance. This was something of an eye-opener. It's so simple. We should have been doing this all along. There was never any reason to send passwords in the clear (well, uuencoded), given HTTP's two-round-trip authentication mechanism. Why is this nifty proposal tucked away in a corner? Why didn't I hear about it before now? I thought I was pretty tuned in to this sort of thing... For the longest time, I was under the impression that the web user base would have two choices: 1. Use a free browser, and access only public information, or send your password essentially in the clear to subscribe to for-pay info. 2. Use a commercial browser that supports the security options (SHTTP, SSL, kerberos...) supported by the services you use. The reason I believed this was that real security is to expensive to develop to give away (and it almost always requires a license of some kind...). As a result, information providers are faced with the unfortunate choice between: 1. Require users to send passwords essentially in the clear. 2. Require users to license a browser. This message is a call to eliminate passwords-in-the-clear from HTTP. This means the browser developers should implement something like the spyglass proposal (it looks like a few hours more work to upgrade to this from the existing basic auth. scheme), and subscription-based information providers should _strongly_ encourage their user base to upgrade. Something like: "Please upgrade to a browser that doesn't send passwords in the clear (such as... links to recommended browsers.). In 6 months, we will not be accepting Basic authentication." I suggest that Spyglass lead the way by releasing source code patches to lynx and Mosaic to implement this enhancement, just to show how it's done. It should be a "simple" excercise for them. Using high-quality services on the web should not be an incentive to send passwords over the net in the clear. Let's fix this! Dan p.s. I hear s-key is another simple technology that eliminates the need to send passwords in the clear. But for the life of me, I can't find a technical description of it. Is there an RFC that I just can't find? Could somebody send me a pointer?
Received on Monday, 9 January 1995 12:00:08 UTC