- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 18:07:28 +0100
- To: Peter Lepeska <bizzbyster@gmail.com>
- Cc: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 08:37:38AM -0500, Peter Lepeska wrote: > > That's exactly what we discussed more than one year ago, offering multiple > > possibilities to the user : > > 1) connect securely to the proxy, communicate in clear through it and to > > the origin server ; > > > > 2) connect securely to the proxy, communicate in clear through it and > > have > > the proxy encrypt to the origin server (aka "GET https://"). > > > > 3) connect securely to the proxy, and communicate using a TLS tunnel to > > the > > origin server (equivalent of CONNECT, but with true confidentiality > > over > > the wire). This is what is described by Peter here. > > > > It is like your #3 except, when no node refuses, the TLS session would use > a NULL cipher. The data in that case is not encrypted but it still contains > a MAC for each message so that browser and web server can authenticate and > check data integrity. You might be right that it's better to build this as > an extension of CONNECT plumbing since that is already the standard > mechanism for establishing an end-to-end TLS session via a proxy. Keep in > mind however that we'd still want to add the proxy messaging to the web > server indicating whether or not it REQUIRED data be sent plaintext TLS, > meaning unencrypted but with auth and data integrity. > > > > > Most users will prefer #3, and when proxy refuses #3 for the requested site > > or whatever, users should be offered the option to switch back to #2 with > > the > > warning about what this implies "this proxy's admin will see everything > > exchanged with the site, do you really want to continue ?". > > > > Can you explain this fall back from #3 to #2 in a little more detail? Why > would the proxy refuse #3? Are you talking about the scenario where the > proxy REQUIRES data be sent in plaintext TLS but the web server refuses? Yes that's exactly that. Let's simply imagine what any proxy admin needs to do : - inspect contents exchanged with webmails and social networks - offer the guarantee to their users that a few sites are whitelisted and will not be deciphered So the admin will configure the proxy this way : - allow CONNECT paypal.com mybank.com yourbank.com theirbank.com - reject CONNECT - allow GET over https At the moment with HTTP/1.1 this is not possible so the two policies are merged into a single choice that depends on the place where the proxy is deployed : - either allow CONNECT for a few sites and reject all other https sites. - or decrypt everything even what shouldn't. Anyway the user hardly knows. Regards, Willy
Received on Wednesday, 27 November 2013 17:08:01 UTC