Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Further Improve Discussion of Secure Transport in Security Schemes #1554

Open
mmccool opened this issue Jun 27, 2022 · 1 comment
Open

Further Improve Discussion of Secure Transport in Security Schemes #1554

mmccool opened this issue Jun 27, 2022 · 1 comment

Comments

@mmccool
Copy link
Contributor

mmccool commented Jun 27, 2022

In #1542, it's still unclear which schemes need TLS and which don't, and which are very weak without it (e.g. Basic). Suggest changing "Generally" in new para to "Except where noted" and then specifying in each schemes that does NOT need secure transport (e.g. in "nosec" add "This scheme does not require secure transport.", in "combo" add "This scheme does not itself require secure transport, but the schemes it combines may.")

@github-actions github-actions bot added the needs-triage Automatically added to new issues. TF should triage them with proper labels label Jun 27, 2022
@JKRhb JKRhb added the Security label Jun 27, 2022
@sebastiankb sebastiankb removed the needs-triage Automatically added to new issues. TF should triage them with proper labels label Jun 29, 2022
@sebastiankb
Copy link
Contributor

from today's TD call:

  • Security TF will discuss this topic
  • most likely there will be a PR which provide additional text about TLS. However, this input will be informative and not normative.

@mmccool mmccool self-assigned this Jul 4, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants