New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 700973 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: Verified
Owner:
Closed: Mar 2017
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: 3
NextAction: 2017-03-17
OS: All
Pri: 3
Type: Task



Sign in to add a comment

Document Certificate Transparency for Embedders

Project Member Reported by rsleevi@chromium.org, Mar 13 2017

Issue description

As Chrome continues with its Certificate Transparency deployment, based on the open-source implementation of the policies in https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/certificate-transparency , other embedders may want or need to explore support for Certificate Transparency in their Chromium-based products.

Thus, //net/docs should provide better guidance as to how to acceptably determine a Certificate Transparency policy in a way that minimizes ecosystem risks while also minimizing security risks.
 

Comment 1 by eranm@chromium.org, Mar 14 2017

I'll be happy to take this on. Ryan, could you confirm that:
* I'll be documenting the initialization of some of the field in URLRequestContextStorage (https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/net/url_request/url_request_context_storage.h)
* That we'd be saying that if the code uses a "real" certificate verifier (CertVerifier::CreateDefault()) then a CT policy *must* be determined.
* That the CT policy could either be the CT policy mentioned in the link above, or a policy that does not require SCTs at all.
* That in the case of not requiring SCTs, the DoNothingCTVerifier should be used together with an "Allow ANY Cert" policy enforcer (https://cs.chromium.org/chromium/src/net/url_request/url_request_unittest.cc?gsn=CTPolicyEnforcer&l=9469)
* That in the case of requiring SCTs, the MultiLogCTVerifier object must be created and initialized with a list of CT logs, and the default CTPolicyEnforcer used.

If all of those are correct, I can make a start on a document.
EstimatedDays: 3
NextAction: 2017-03-17
Owner: rsleevi@chromium.org
Status: Assigned (was: Untriaged)
I think the documentation needs to extend beyond those points. That describes a lot of the 'how' - and yes, that sounds correct - but in particular, I think the documentation and guidance also needs to discuss the 'why' - for both now and future releases - and the tradeoffs that products and consumers should be aware of when deciding these. That's far more pressing than the how.

I'll take a stab at an initial write-up this week for the why, and then we can expand with the how - does that sound good?

Comment 3 by eranm@chromium.org, Mar 16 2017

SGTM.
Project Member

Comment 4 by bugdroid1@chromium.org, Mar 17 2017

The following revision refers to this bug:
  https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/1b256461b832243250d8139c2a0e15e7fd5336ec

commit 1b256461b832243250d8139c2a0e15e7fd5336ec
Author: rsleevi <rsleevi@chromium.org>
Date: Fri Mar 17 14:49:19 2017

Add documentation for Certificate Transparency in //net

BUG= 700973 

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2756633002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#457766}

[add] https://crrev.com/1b256461b832243250d8139c2a0e15e7fd5336ec/net/docs/certificate-transparency.md

Status: Verified (was: Assigned)
Project Member

Comment 6 by bugdroid1@chromium.org, Mar 17 2017

The following revision refers to this bug:
  https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/a8b24819979eaf3727465ecdbf89e462cf98f817

commit a8b24819979eaf3727465ecdbf89e462cf98f817
Author: rsleevi <rsleevi@chromium.org>
Date: Fri Mar 17 15:14:32 2017

Update Certificate Transparency documentation for Gitiles

Absolutify the links, per https://gerrit.googlesource.com/gitiles/+/HEAD/Documentation/markdown.md
documenting support, fix a mailto link (which auto-linking broke), and
fix a '/` typo

BUG= 700973 
TBR=eranm@chromium.org

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2758763002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#457770}

[modify] https://crrev.com/a8b24819979eaf3727465ecdbf89e462cf98f817/net/docs/certificate-transparency.md

Sign in to add a comment