Re: [Cfrg] [TLS] wiretapping draft

FYI. Contributions from folks here would be welcome
if you're interested,
Cheers,
S.

PS: This relates to ongoing discussion on the TLS list.

On 11/07/17 11:48, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> 
> Hiya,
> 
> I've asked the chairs for a slot in Prague to allow
> for rebutting the claims made by the proponents of
> the most recent wiretapping draft we're (sadly, still)
> discussing. [1]
> 
> So far the chairs seem un-keen, but I'm gonna keep
> asking as I think having a rebuttal for this kind
> of bad idea is needed. (And again, I'd prefer the
> chairs ditch the entire idea of discussing this at
> all.)
> 
> In any case, and perhaps with a view to longer-term
> documenting the arguments against the various "let's
> break TLS" proposals we continually see, I've started
> to collect some of those arguments in a github repo [2].
> 
> I would welcome contributions to [2] however folks
> would like to provide 'em (but ideally via PRs) so
> we can provide a nice crowd-sourced rebuttal in
> Prague, either as a presentation or via a lively
> mic-line if need be.
> 
> Cheers,
> S.
> 
> PS: I've just started on this, but will go through
> the list archive to extract others' arguments and
> add acks. Not sure if that'll get done before we
> end up in Prague but please do let me know if I've
> used an argument you made so I can ack that later.
> 
> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-green-tls-static-dh-in-tls13-01
> [2] https://github.com/sftcd/tinfoil
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
> 

Re: [Cfrg] [TLS] wiretapping draft - collecting rebuttal arguments

Attachment: signature.asc