Re: ACTION-538: Draft proposals for 6.2.G

I like this proposal:

> What protection level is represented by the [ref TLS indicator];

> If the Web page is [ref weakly] TLS-protected, then, what conditions 
> cause the protection to be weak (e.g., bad algorithms, mixed 
> content, ...)

It seems straightforward; its meant to provide a more detailed explanation 
of the state shown to the user, should one be desired. What is the cause 
of your unhappiness (or lack of 100% joy)? 





From:
Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
To:
WSC WG <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
Date:
12/22/2008 09:43 AM
Subject:
ACTION-538: Draft proposals for 6.2.G
Sent by:
public-wsc-wg-request@w3.org




Section 6.2.G is the following piece of additional security information:

> The information sources SHOULD make the following security context 
> information available: ...

> Whether a Web page is TLS-protected, whether the protection is weak 
> or strong, and the reasons for the value of the protection


According to the relevant minutes [1], I said on 24 October that I 
could see two different ways of going about this one.

 From the notes of the discussion, I think the choice was between the 
following two:

> Whether a Web page is TLS-protected, and what strength this 
> protection has

or:

> What protection level is represented by the [ref TLS indicator];

> If the Web page is [ref weakly] TLS-protected, then, what conditions 
> cause the protection to be weak (e.g., bad algorithms, mixed 
> content, ...)


I'm not 100% happy with this, and would appreciate feed-back.

1. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-wsc-wg/2008Dec/0004.html
--
Thomas Roessler, W3C  <tlr@w3.org>