- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 02:09:16 +0100
- To: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 02:15:46PM -0700, Alex Rousskov wrote: > > This allows you to use cryptographic > > confirmation that you are talking to the appropriate proxy, since it can > > provide you such an assertion over that hop (which it cannot do the same > > if acting as an interception proxy). > > No, secure communication with forward proxies is currently not supported > by many popular browsers. They can tunnel HTTPS through a forward HTTP > proxy, but they cannot be configured to encrypt their connection to the > forward proxy using TLS. > > However, let's ignore that huge problem as well. Let's assume I trust my > unsecure connection to the forward proxy. > > Now, I enter "google.com" in my address bar and ... I get an error > because Google redirects me to a secure site and the forward proxy > cannot inspect my HTTPS communication with Google, blocking me despite > my consent to be inspected. > > I have consented. I have set up an explicit proxy. The proxy plays by > the rules. And yet nothing works! At this point, my employer is forced > to attack my HTTPS traffic even though neither they nor me want to > resort to those dirty tricks. This is what ought to be covered by what we used to call the "GET https://" a few years ago, ie : ask a trusted proxy to be the TLS endpoint. This would get rid of a lot of legitimate MiTM devices and make them more suspicious again. From what I remember from the conversations, the main difficulty to address is how to let the user *clearly* know that his connection is going to be seen by the proxy or is truly secure (CONNECT). The other one (less important for the long term, might be a technical issue for the short term) was that doing TLS inside a CONNECT tunnel over a TLS proxy connection was not the easiest thing to do, probably in part because SSL libs APIs are even harder to use between chained buffers than they are between a buffer and a file descriptor. While this last point can justify some delay in deployment, it should not be a showstopper at all. I find the first issue (user experience) a real one that deserves some discussion though. Willy
Received on Saturday, 5 December 2015 01:09:46 UTC