W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2021

Re: New Version Notification for draft-kazuho-httpbis-selftrace-00.txt

From: Roberto Peon <fenix@fb.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2021 17:50:47 +0000
To: Roberto Peon <fenix=40fb.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Ryan Sleevi <ryan-ietf@sleevi.com>, Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>
CC: Jana Iyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com>, Robin MARX <robin.marx@uhasselt.be>, IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EA6B8FE3-09B4-4050-8EE1-2CD1D9AB7FD0@fb.com>
Oops, this was a reply to the wrong thread—meant for the tracing discussion (as likely one would infer).
-=R

From: QUIC <quic-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Roberto Peon <fenix=40fb.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Date: Sunday, August 15, 2021 at 10:49 AM
To: Ryan Sleevi <ryan-ietf@sleevi.com>, Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>
Cc: Jana Iyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com>, Robin MARX <robin.marx@uhasselt.be>, IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-kazuho-httpbis-selftrace-00.txt

My main concern would be side-channel attacks.
What kind of information can be gleaned by the size/timing of the trace as it is sent from one side to another?
What hypotheses does it allow an attacker to verify?
-=R

From: QUIC <quic-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Ryan Sleevi <ryan-ietf@sleevi.com>
Date: Sunday, August 15, 2021 at 1:13 AM
To: Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>
Cc: Jana Iyengar <jri.ietf@gmail.com>, Robin MARX <robin.marx@uhasselt.be>, IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-kazuho-httpbis-selftrace-00.txt



On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 8:24 PM Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com<mailto:kazuhooku@gmail.com>> wrote:


3) Relatedly, your POC seems to assume the browser will have just a single connection and a trace request in a second tab will auto map to that connection.
    That works fine for the POC, but for a real deployment that lets end-users fetch traces, you'd need built-in browser/client support to select a specific connection / fetch traces for all connections to a given origin.
     Not a big problem ofc, and things like Chrome's netlog export already do this, but still a practical hurdle.

Right. I would hope that it would be possible to implement this as a browser extension at least (with the assumption being that requests from a browser extension would be coalesced with other requests going to the same authority).

Unfortunately, browsers do not guarantee this property, and past efforts in the IETF to standardize features that assume this property (e.g. Token Binding) or in other SDOs (e.g. ETSI’s unfortunate design with regards to QWACs) end up not working in practice.

This is especially true as browsers look to segment connections even further, in relation to privacy properties unique to browser environments (e.g. CORS credentialless, as further expanded by COEP, or the fetch() specifications Network Partition Keys, or security isolation primitives to restrict extension access).

I don’t have much stake in this, other than flagging that any design that makes assumptions about connection properties to bits on screen are, generally, flawed assumptions. That’s not to preclude the possibility of direct browser integrations, should it prove useful and of demonstrable value to merit such implementation, although past efforts have failed to achieve that value relative to the complexities of such coupling.
Received on Sunday, 15 August 2021 17:51:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Sunday, 15 August 2021 17:51:12 UTC