- From: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 10:21:13 -0800
- To: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, W3C TAG <www-tag@w3.org>
- CC: Mark Davis <mark.davis@icu-project.org>, Deborah Goldsmith <goldsmit@apple.com>, "chris.newman@innosoft.com" <chris.newman@innosoft.com>, "mrc@washington.edu" <mrc@washington.edu>, "www-international@w3.org" <www-international@w3.org>, "ietf-charsets@iana.org" <ietf-charsets@iana.org>, Misha Wolf <Misha.Wolf@reuters.com>
> But as far as the browsers are concerned, if the TAG can come > up with a finding that e.g. also gives some more details and > examples about the security issues you mention, then we might > also be able to point to this document from anything on the > IETF or IANA side. Here is a publicly available description of this problem: http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/fulldisclosure/2006-10/0296.html /paulc Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3 Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329 mailto:Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com > -----Original Message----- > From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of > Martin Duerst > Sent: December 15, 2006 2:26 AM > To: Roy T. Fielding; W3C TAG > Cc: Mark Davis; Deborah Goldsmith; chris.newman@innosoft.com; > mrc@washington.edu; www-international@w3.org; ietf-charsets@iana.org; > Misha Wolf > Subject: Re: ban the use and implementation of UTF-7 > > > Hello Roy, > > As you can see at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-international/2006OctDec/0144, > Mark Davis, one of the authors, essentially agrees with you. > In a followup on the ietf-charsets mailing list, Deborah Goldsmith, > the other author of the UTF-7 spec, also agrees. > > The only place I'm aware that (a variant!) of UTF-8 is used is > for IMAP folder name internationalization. See e.g. > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2192.txt for details. > In hindsight, using an UTF-7 variant in the protocol seems > unnecessary, but the original idea (mostly by Mark Crispin, > as far as I understand it) was that it could be used as is > on the server side, even on totally un-internationalized > operating systems. > > As for the browsers, I think they just added UTF-7 at one time > because the name looked similar to UTF-8 and UTF-16, and it was > difficult to predict exactly how these encodings would deploy. > And as in any software, it's difficult to get rid of something, > but security reasons are about the best you can come up with > for cleaning up. > > As for the IANA charset registry > (http://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets), Ned and > me (who are currently the expert reviewers) as well as the > other list participants have been talking about cleaning it > up. We don't currently yet have an exact idea of what needs > to be done, but being able to attach security warnings or > similar comments to an entry might be one possible way to > proceed. The problem might be that RFC 2152 > (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2152.txt) might have to be updated. > > But as far as the browsers are concerned, if the TAG can come > up with a finding that e.g. also gives some more details and > examples about the security issues you mention, then we might > also be able to point to this document from anything on the > IETF or IANA side. > > Regards, Martin. > > At 07:13 06/12/15, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > > >Over the years I have seen a number of security exploits that make > >use of broken browsers that sniff character encodings in combination > >with UTF-7 encoded tags or javascript commands. I have never actually > >seen anyone use UTF-7 for anything legitimate (other than testing). > > > >Is there some reason why WWW clients need to support UTF-7? > > > >It seems completely unnecessary given the now ubiquitous use of 8-bit > >clean transports and the presence of UTF-8, which IIRC was defined > >long after UTF-7. However, the wider community may be aware of > >some reason why browsers should support it, so I'd like to hear > >your comments. > > > >If there is no need for UTF-7, I'd like the TAG to consider it an > >issue for the sake of asking browsers to remove its implementation > >and banning its use by servers. > > > >I know this won't solve any problems for deployed clients, and > >wouldn't be an issue at all if servers used the same algorithm for > >escaping characters that clients used to interpret them, but in the > >long term it will simplify some checks for XSS attacks and I don't > >think it will harm the Web. That is, unless there is some significant > >body of content out there that is encoded as UTF-7. > > > >Cheers, > > > >Roy T. Fielding <http://roy.gbiv.com/> > >Chief Scientist, Day Software <http://www.day.com/> > > > > > > > #-#-# Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University > #-#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp >
Received on Friday, 22 December 2006 18:21:56 UTC