Re: Bruce Schneier's Proposal to dedicate November meeting to saving the Internet from the NSA

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Fri, 06 September 2013 19:33 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 01C9D21E80E8 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 12:33:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.917
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.917 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.610, BAYES_00=-2.599, MISSING_HEADERS=1.292, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 IRfdicc-RR-s for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 12:33:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 081A121E80BF for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 12:33:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.66] (76-218-9-215.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.9.215]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r86JXETW010413 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 12:33:18 -0700
Message-ID: <522A2DEB.9080408@dcrocker.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2013 12:32:59 -0700
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
CC: "ietf@ietf.org Discussion" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Bruce Schneier's Proposal to dedicate November meeting to saving the Internet from the NSA
References: <5F053C0B-4678-4680-A8BF-62FF282ADDCE@softarmor.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1309051743130.47262@hiroshima.bogus.com> <52293197.1060809@gmail.com> <5C7FECAB-8A22-4AF1-B023-456458E1B288@nominum.com> <522949C2.8010206@gmail.com> <5229AEDE.8090202@cisco.com> <CAMzo+1Z7bEmKuBE9Hkx1pTQnZVPajxCWGBN3JF=pAPFwUrN=pQ@mail.gmail.com> <5229ECF0.3040409@dcrocker.net> <A76C47A6-5F5B-4C01-8674-B0939B12839B@softarmor.com>
In-Reply-To: <A76C47A6-5F5B-4C01-8674-B0939B12839B@softarmor.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.66]); Fri, 06 Sep 2013 12:33:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
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, 06 Sep 2013 19:33:24 -0000

On 9/6/2013 11:42 AM, Dean Willis wrote:
> On Sep 6, 2013, at 9:55 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote:
>> In other words, the IETF needs to assume that we don't know what
>> will work for end users and we need to therefore focus more on
>> processing by end /systems/ rather than end /users/.
>
> But we are also end users.

Mostly we are /not/.

That is... of course we are end-users.  And to the extent that the
target market for something is users similar to "us", then fine.

The problem is when the target market is mass-market end-users.  The 3-4
billion other folk who don't participate in the IETF.  The average IETF
participant is  wildly different from the average mass-market end-user,
in many different ways.  Very many.


> So, we could eat our own dogfood,

Oh we definitely /should/ eat our own dogfood.  If the stuff we produce
is not even usable for us, well then...  And I think we can learn quite
a bit of how to improve things.

But my deeper point is that that is nowhere close to sufficient, for
demonstrating mass-market usability or efficacy.




On 9/6/2013 10:25 AM, Michael Richardson wrote:
> 1) We could be telling the public about the protocols that we
> designed 10, 15, and even 20 years ago. Some of which even have
> rather widespread implementation, but seem to have zero use. (S/MIME
> is in every copy of Outlook and Thunderbird, AFAIK)

To what end?  Their poor uptake clearly demonstrates some basic 
usability deficiencies.  That doesn't get fixed by promotional efforts.


> What would the spam situation be like if 90% of emails were
> regularly signed back in 1999?

You mean the way that postal mail and telephone calls require you to 
authenticate yourself personally before you can use them?

Or the way you have to authenticate yourself before you can buy anything 
in a store?

There are tradeoffs here and they can have very considerable downsides.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net