if they didn't open RDNS clients wouldn't allowed to override it: although 
I would say that's working as intended, as wriiting a certificate for a 
year on dynamic IPs that may another person use few days later doesn't look 
like good idea.

2022년 12월 3일 토요일 오전 1시 59분 1초 UTC+9에 [email protected]님이 작성:

>
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 9:56 AM Paul Wouters <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2 Dec 2022, 'Kurt Seifried' via [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> > I read it briefly but it seems to me like there's a significant 
>> failure/abuse scenario:
>> > ISP controls an IP block that it portions out to customers. ISP has a 
>> web server and puts in the IP/IPv6 CAA records.
>> > 
>> > Customers that use delegated IP space from the ISP can now only use 
>> those CAAs as well if they want to use this standard, correct?
>> > 
>> > If this is correct, and I was a CA and read this I'd be building a 
>> PowerPoint deck for my sales team on how ISP's can partner with
>> > us to get a 20-50% commission on sales of certificates by doing this 
>> one simple thing...
>>
>> No,
>
>
>>
>> As Antonios wrote:
>>
>>         a CAA record in 2.0.0.c.d.3.d.0.a.2.ip6.arpa takes precedence 
>> over one in 0.c.d.3.d.0.a.2.ip6.arpa .
>>
>> Paul
>>
>
> Right, sorry got it backwards, couldn't the ISP also declare a CAA record 
> at a lower level assuming they control the IP space....
>  
>
>>
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 9:23 AM Antonios Chariton <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>> >       Hello everyone,
>> > I have submitted the following Internet Draft to the IETF LAMPS Working 
>> Group for
>> > consideration: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-chariton-ipcaa/ 
>> > 
>> > You can read the mailing list thread here: 
>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/dQLF1fQQPNX9A59YV4imXRz9ABw/
>> > 
>> > This proposes the creation of a new CAA record property, on top of the 
>> existing ones, e.g. “issuewild”, that will allow an
>> > entity controlling an IP address to benefit from the power of CAA 
>> records.
>> > 
>> > The idea is to add CAA records to the “reverse DNS” zones, ip6.arpa and 
>> in-addr.arpa, that support the hierarchical nature of
>> > DNS: a CAA record in 2.0.0.c.d.3.d.0.a.2.ip6.arpa takes precedence over 
>> one in 0.c.d.3.d.0.a.2.ip6.arpa .
>> > 
>> > As this is relevant to the WebPKI, I am sending this e-mail here to 
>> solicit your feedback on the idea, any potential
>> > improvements, etc.
>> > 
>> > Thanks,
>> > Antonis
>> > 
>> > GitHub Repo: https://github.com/daknob/draft-chariton-ipcaa
>> > HTML: https://daknob.github.io/draft-chariton-ipcaa/
>> > TXT: https://daknob.github.io/draft-chariton-ipcaa/draft.txt 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>> Groups "[email protected]" group.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>> an email to
>> > [email protected].
>> > To view this discussion on the web visit
>> > 
>> https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/788376DF-8D67-48E0-AEE1-52085183217D%40gmail.com
>> .
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > --
>> > Kurt Seifried (He/Him)
>> > [email protected]
>> > 
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>> Groups "[email protected]" group.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>> an email to [email protected].
>>
> > To view this discussion on the web visithttps://
>> groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/CABqVa38YV3OgykOCm-x-OR0_Fh8WXNG6g7gNvcUGo9vwG3bKtQ%40mail.gma
>> > il.com.
>> > 
>> >
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Kurt Seifried (He/Him)
> [email protected]
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"[email protected]" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/99bcc6d7-b003-4fb6-93d4-a39be9eddf4en%40mozilla.org.

Reply via email to