- From: Ian Fette <ifette@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 11:13:02 -0800
- To: michael.mccormick@wellsfargo.com
- Cc: public-wsc-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <bbeaa26f0803041113p2fdd5711t4bcd8bfe96c9a10c@mail.gmail.com>
This seems bad to me. Specifically, trying HTTPS before HTTP is going to be costly to some few number of sites. E.g. a ton of users just type in google.com, yahoo.com, microsoft.com. For many of these use cases, SSL is not appropriate. I understand the desire that for banks it goes to https, but for the general web this is not a good thing IMHO. What would be better is to say that if you're a banking site, you should immediately redirect from http:// to https://. Trying to move the whole web to https:// is very different, and is basically what you propose. On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 7:49 AM, <michael.mccormick@wellsfargo.com> wrote: > *http://no-www.org/* <http://no-www.org/> > *http://yes-www.org/* <http://yes-www.org/> > > No doubt most of you are familiar with these web sites, and with the > arguments for and against requiring host names in URLs. > > Most browsers seem to make it a moot point by accepting both forms of > URL. If I type "example.com" into my browser it takes me to * > http://www.example.com* <http://www.example.com>. The agent is letting me > be lazy and skip typing the protocol (*http://*) or hostname (*www.*) > portions of my destination address. > > The process of URL disambiguation, whereby the UA attempts to guess parts > of the address the user has omitted, should be standardized for both > security & experience reasons: > > [protocol://][host.][domain][.TLD][:port][/[path]][?query] > > - If protocol omitted, UA must try https before http. (Always prefer a > TLS protected destination.) > > - If host omitted, and protocol is http(s), UA may try the host name > "www" in the target domain if it has a DNS record, unless the agent is in > SBM mode. > > - etc. > > *Michael McCormick, CISSP* > Lead Security Architect, Information Security Technologies > Wells Fargo Bank > "THESE OPINIONS ARE STRICTLY MY OWN AND NOT NECESSARILY THOSE OF WELLS > FARGO" > *This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If > you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, > you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message > or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, > please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this > message. Thank you for your cooperation.* >
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2008 19:13:44 UTC