Hello,
Based on Your feedback (for which I am grateful) I have designed a new version
of the access_administratively_disabled mechanism.

1. One new AlertDescription value should be specified:
access_administratively_disabled.

2. The information why the webpage is blocked is specified at the URL
https://access_administratively_disabled.net?d=${domain_name} as a simple 
string.

3. Certificates for access_administratively_disabled.net are assigned in a
non-usual way: any big entity that blocks websites (e.g. OpenDNS) may get a
certificate for access_administratively_disabled.net provided that their
identity is validated (i.e. in an Extended-Validation way). The list of entities
that received certificates for this domain would be made public and managed by
IANA. This way the risk of phishing would be eliminated.

4. Any entity that is blocking some websites would redirect traffic for
access_administratively_disabled.net to their own servers.
                                        
5. After getting an access_administratively_disabled warning a browser would
open https://access_admininistratively_disabled.net?d=${domain_name} , validate
its certificate and display to the user information: what get blocked, by whom
and why.

6. If https://access_administratively_disabled.net would not have a valid
certificate, the browser would only display that the website is being blocked,
without giving any reason.

7. IANA or someone else would provide a default
https://access_administratively_disabled.net service for the public internet.

This mechanism would provide blocking transparency without affecting security.

Greetings,
Mateusz Jończyk

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls

Reply via email to