Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-jmap-contacts-06

Request Review of draft-ietf-jmap-contacts
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 09)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2024-04-04
Requested 2024-03-20
Authors Neil Jenkins
I-D last updated 2024-04-03
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -06 by Shivan Kaul Sahib (diff)
Artart Telechat review of -09 by Tim Bray
Opsdir Last Call review of -06 by Linda Dunbar (diff)
Artart Last Call review of -06 by Tim Bray (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -06 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Shivan Kaul Sahib
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-jmap-contacts by Security Area Directorate Assigned
Posted at
Reviewed revision 06 (document currently at 09)
Result Has issues
Completed 2024-04-03
Section 1.4
This section says "This document defines two additional capability URIs." but
AFAICT it's only one i.e. urn:ietf:params:jmap:contacts

Section 2
Why does description property not have any restrictions unlike the name

In general, it's a bit confusing which properties are mandatory and which are
optional: sometimes it's pretty obvious (id and name), and sometimes it's not
(sortOrder). I would highly recommend explicitly labelling all properties as
either mandatory (and then defining what the possible values are), or optional
(similar, but also with a sensible default).

Looks like Principal is missing a reference to

mayDelete property in AddressBookRights is confusing, since I first thought it
means the ability to delete ContactCards since that's what mayRead and mayWrite

Section 5
The Security Considerations section needs to address the fact that a user query
which uses filtering/sorting is basically untrusted input and recommend how to
sanitize and treat the input. It should at the very least point to RFC 8620
security guidance around parsing JSON input.