Re: [Cfrg] Requesting removal of CFRG co-chair

John Viega <> Tue, 24 December 2013 02:50 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C717A1AE396 for <>; Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:50:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TdKhxsfBRcGx for <>; Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:50:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5458D1AE392 for <>; Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:50:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id 1so6045944qec.9 for <>; Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:49:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=qcagzixd+QouHHHqktPS6N0KmeN8ak2qh3cxm0RSejM=; b=HP9Ej5w/HAH6hJgGsuqbVXNCrsp4/zAeOG0ygNaNg5ppYSM+DIx8p/fjHvMur3TpBm X8Ypj2rF/h9SRFILjNUwZJV5xEsQhs+c8oZ64aJ/zQg4bvdogkzcvBXnq9/cRJlzdESm 6YOPBxiqxSXipAj3gOj6VGMYX2Mz1h92VJIXZda+wzB4FOWwBUyO3poMPdtr4JxyH1RF oq2LWtt5ny5+Z6dMXVWFA1Y7BXQb3PaaWmU1FhdWjkUZRrXSSXXotysMX/AyWJ9+Cd1A MEWjHcr59ZTJd0hQhAHRgbF8ff48c2VhHeOgNlU2xXxkaY+4iCsBhJ21S3dW9Mwgb5Wc Jxag==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl6Rq5emlL71VeC0N/BIcv6uZVK0ywQDnjEhO69X/TfpuYm81U2EDk1jYSBtectnTT/+5Dv
X-Received: by with SMTP id o8mr48046577qab.100.1387853397666; Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:49:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id o10sm34009344qaa.6.2013. for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:49:56 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_DF45EF34-E07E-45EC-9A7C-11CCAE27942D"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
From: John Viega <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 21:49:24 -0500
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
To: Tao Effect <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Requesting removal of CFRG co-chair
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2013 02:50:03 -0000

Whether Mr. Igoe is using an alias or is a composite is, I think, irrelevant to anything other than his credentials for getting the job in the first place (and, I’m quite sure he’s real).

I think it’s reasonable to hold the opinion that this discussion is silly and overhyped.  I think there’s a good chance that Mr. Igoe had no subversive intent whatsoever.  I also don’t see how an IRTF working group chair can, with high probability, subvert the process (though that doesn’t mean it isn’t possible).  

However, I would ask people who are annoyed by the discussion to realize that public perception is important.  The fact that people are coming out of the woodwork to comment just emphasizes that many people perceive this as an issue (though I don’t consider myself coming as out of the woodwork— I’ve been lurking for years, and have definitely posted a few times in the past).

To me, the most important thing the group can do is address how it makes sure to protect from subversive actors.  If we had a clear answer there, then I think it matters far less who the chair is, because we can give outside eyes a better comfort level.  I don’t think it’s productive to be dismissive of the concern, even if you do not agree.


On Dec 23, 2013, at 9:15 PM, Tao Effect <> wrote:

> On Dec 23, 2013, at 9:05 PM, Richard Barnes <> wrote:
>> Kevin is a regular IETF attendee, and an author of several RFCs.  
> I never questioned that his name appears on several RFCs.
> I even linked to such an RFC. :-)
> It's just starting to become rather obvious that whoever is carrying this name around, probably considers it to either be an alias.
> And even if that's not the case, it seems rather strange that someone who is serving as co-chair of an organization that makes recommendations to the world about the cryptography that it uses, appears to be rather difficult to hold accountable for the accusations that have been levied against him by multiple people in this thread.
> So, the members of the CFRG might not be real people and don't seem to have any accountability? Is this the moral of the story?
> It's also interesting to see some of the replies to my innocent questions.
> Here's one from Stephen Farrell, it can be summarized entirely like so: "Oh FFS. Please cut the crap."
> Here's one from John Bradley: "+1 Stephen's comment"
> Some substance, gentlemen, please? This is not Facebook. It's easy to disturb the air with exclamations, but it's not a nice thing to do when your empty replies land hundreds? of inboxes.
> Cheers,
> Greg
> --
> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA.
>> He is most definitely a real person.  
>> --Richard
> _______________________________________________
> Cfrg mailing list