RFC Errata
Found 2 records.
Status: Verified (1)
RFC 4616, "The PLAIN Simple Authentication and Security Layer (SASL) Mechanism", August 2006
Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 8996
Source of RFC: sasl (sec)
Errata ID: 6235
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Benjamin Kaduk
Date Reported: 2020-07-24
Verifier Name: Roman Danyliw
Date Verified: 2022-01-19
Section 1 says:
The PLAIN mechanism should not be used without adequate data security protection as this mechanism affords no integrity or confidentiality protections itself. The mechanism is intended to be used with data security protections provided by application-layer protocol, generally through its use of Transport Layer Security ([TLS]) services.
It should say:
The PLAIN mechanism should not be used without adequate data security protection as this mechanism affords no integrity or confidentiality protections itself. The mechanism is intended to be used with data security protections provided by an application-layer protocol, generally through its use of Transport Layer Security ([TLS]) services.
Notes:
Missing "an" in "an application-layer protocol".
Status: Held for Document Update (1)
RFC 4616, "The PLAIN Simple Authentication and Security Layer (SASL) Mechanism", August 2006
Note: This RFC has been updated by RFC 8996
Source of RFC: sasl (sec)
Errata ID: 2629
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Julien Élie
Date Reported: 2010-11-12
Held for Document Update by: Tim Polk
Section 1 says:
Specifications for IETF protocols that indicate that this mechanism is an applicable authentication mechanism MUST mandate that implementations support an strong data security service, such as TLS.
It should say:
Specifications for IETF protocols that indicate that this mechanism is an applicable authentication mechanism MUST mandate that implementations support a strong data security service, such as TLS.
Notes:
Just a typo in "a strong data security service".