> You seem to be responding to some other thread. As both Adam Langley and I > mentioned, none of the changes that anyone is investigating for reducing > middlebox-induced breakage affect the cryptographic properties of TLS.
my apologies. i can only plead low caffeine (6:45 am tokyo time). the proper threads would have been draft-green-tls-static-dh-in-tls13 draft-rhrd-tls-tls13-visibility etc etc etc it's getting to be that you can smell a red herring by the word 'datacenter' when it's really vendors of surveillance gear and three letter agencies. > On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 2:42 PM, Randy Bush <ra...@psg.com> wrote: ^^^^^^^ that's your clock, not mine :) > >> there are a lot of us lurkers out here a bit horrified watching this wg >> go off the rails. >> >> it would help if vendors of devices which break privacy would stop >> speaking for 'datacenters' and let datacenters speak for themselves. i >> have not seen any doing so. my $dayjob has>10 medium sized datacenters >> serving everything from banks to telcos to scaled cloud services. i can >> not find folk in our datacenter groups who see a need to break e2e >> encryption. >> >> if the interception proposals ensured that user is notified and able to >> prevent session interception, then i would believe this. but if they do >> not, then let's face it, this is all about selling surveillance gear to >> snooping enterprises and repressive regiemes where people with guns take >> you away at 3am because your session was decoded. >> >> can we please provide real end to end privacy or call this wg something >> else? randy _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls