- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 06:25:52 +0100
- To: www-tag <www-tag@w3.org>
Should W3C specifications, following IETF practice, be required to include a "security considerations" section? (Apologies if this is the wrong forum for this, but I don't know of a better one.) I recently proposed that the core provenance specification, which is about to be published for last call review, should include a "security considerations" section. There was no support for this in the working group, for reasons that were, roughly, "this is just a data format, not a protocol, so it doesn't need security considerations". I think that reasoning is flawed, as security needs to be considered pervasively across specifications that are used to build an application. I suggest that many of the serious security problems that web/internet users face today have components that involve abuse of "data formats" rather than protocols - phishing, cross-site scripting, leakage of confidential/private information, etc. IETF specifications are required to include a security considerations (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2223#section-9, http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4677#section-8.4.4, http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3552). My experience with editing and reviewing IETF specifications is that this requirement does prompt consideration by the designers, and more importantly by reviewers, of security issues that may be raised by new specifications. (Another response to my proposal was that it could be done separately as a best practice note, because it's not part of the main specification and will probably need to be updated after the specification is published. My concern with separate publication as a practice note is that, if it gets done at all, it won't receive the same level of reviewer attention.) Considering security is not a pervasive part of the W3C culture in the way that it is in the IETF, but I am raising for consideration that we should be considering steps to make it so. #g --
Received on Friday, 13 July 2012 05:27:26 UTC