Re: Security for various IETF services

Dick Franks <rwfranks@acm.org> Wed, 09 April 2014 00:03 UTC

Return-Path: <rwfranks@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD4AA1A04A7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 17:03:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4K952IrKPDG0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 17:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yh0-x236.google.com (mail-yh0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A9AA1A04A6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 17:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yh0-f54.google.com with SMTP id f73so1673019yha.13 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 17:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=ORhzItk2fDHik6BQOEX/0IqsWmZKtodvyF3R6XJDmpw=; b=zgiHZzA/bVCeYtyeBkBVwKLOjl0/zQt+TBP/HbC065TAh/yZpsE8uiwpEAqTUEKyFm 2uVr2qdNnmoqpy18xUehCjsqsmnRWLKzx7PYyetd60cb0jvbjQTa4TCdMVNgeP7eMnwR zHQya9O+ZwK3ZUNwfH7ATjWP+xiYewmA52clvGp55U9O24K4j3NTaXM4UbP+ZxKqyM+u szChGIK/NzvjrST3W3zFxix/GRG+ZKlFQECXs3ISqFqzQpNjduH9uK9MyZwFDq089K0D czDnhZV2y6cRbLx5dm8mJlbiCYDkJyIr0b1NvrW9J3d1bseQn/jXCd6bYqRx5HUWzHUX kJww==
X-Received: by 10.236.149.38 with SMTP id w26mr7375555yhj.51.1397001816182; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 17:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: rwfranks@gmail.com
Received: by 10.170.129.143 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 17:02:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <011301cf532a$b4cd02a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
References: <533D8A90.60309@cs.tcd.ie> <533EEF35.7070901@isdg.net> <27993A73-491B-4590-9F37-0C0D369B4C6F@cisco.com> <CAHBU6iuX8Y8VCgkY1Qk+DEPEgN2=DWbNEWVffyVmmP_3qmmmig@mail.gmail.com> <53427277.30707@cisco.com> <B275762E-3A1A-44A3-80BE-67F4C8B115B2@trammell.ch> <53428593.3020707@cs.tcd.ie> <A33A3F1E-8F6D-4BD9-8D1B-B24FBCD74D8D@nominum.com> <5342B26B.5020704@gmail.com> <011301cf532a$b4cd02a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
From: Dick Franks <rwfranks@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 01:02:56 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: oPcz_y1BgzfRMxZ_cC42Wzc9JPk
Message-ID: <CAKW6Ri5=6eVEKvJ3SVrFxnX9Hd1vxUFW9n4p99g=NM+LHky9kA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Security for various IETF services
To: "t.p." <daedulus@btconnect.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf302efb0201121e04f690d5d2
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/HtKaO8tcYDlZ11A3yMgXrHsnw8s
Cc: IETF-Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 00:03:37 -0000

On 8 April 2014 09:32, t.p. <daedulus@btconnect.com> wrote:

>
>
> The path that I have seen several Security ADs steer Working Groups down
> is to start with a threat analysis before deciding what counter measures
> are appropriate.
>
>
Several contributors have been saying exactly that for almost a week.

These suggestions have been answered by dismissive emails and a relentless
bombardment of magic pixie dust.