Re: [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-prismatic-reflections-00.txt]

Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Fri, 20 September 2013 11:18 UTC

Return-Path: <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D747E21F93B9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 04:18:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.104
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.104 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.194, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V9QncACBMU+D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 04:18:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 6D9DD21F9399 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 04:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 76207 invoked from network); 20 Sep 2013 11:13:35 -0000
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (131.112.32.132) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 20 Sep 2013 11:13:35 -0000
Message-ID: <523C2E7E.8070507@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 20:16:14 +0900
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-prismatic-reflections-00.txt]
References: <CE61D529.11007%Josh.Howlett@Ja.net>
In-Reply-To: <CE61D529.11007%Josh.Howlett@Ja.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 11:19:00 -0000

Josh Howlett wrote:

> I confess that I am confused by much of this discussion.

Several people in IETF is under control of NSA, maybe.

> As I understand
> it, PRISM is not a signals intelligence activity; it only addresses that
> data at rest within those organisations who have partnered with the NSA.
> As such, improving protocol security will achieve nothing against PRISM;
> it is a socio-political issue that is outside of the scope of a technical
> standards organisation.

Right.

> As such the only practical way for a typical user to protect themselves
> against PRISM is to switch to other providers based in jurisdictions that
> provide the appropriate protections, or agitate to change the applicable
> laws within their own jurisdiction, where appropriate.

Not necessarily.

The proper protection is to avoid cloud services and have our
own end systems fully under control of ourselves.

Toward the goal, IETF should shutdown all the cloud related
WGs and never develop any protocol to promote cloud service.

> This is not, of course, an argument not to improve the security of our
> protocols for other reasons, but let's please motivate this work
> correctly. It will yield a greater probability of success.

Using DH could protect us, until USG start deploying active attack.

So, it is important to develop technologies to detect attacks
against DH.

						Masataka Ohta