IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities

Rich Kulawiec <rsk@gsp.org> Wed, 05 April 2017 11:37 UTC

Return-Path: <rsk@gsp.org>
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 5BD34129480 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 04:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 O9UzJfmLu7kv for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 04:37:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from taos.firemountain.net (taos.firemountain.net [207.114.3.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20769129476 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 04:37:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gsp.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by taos.firemountain.net (8.15.1/8.14.9) with SMTP id v35BbGge028423 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 07:37:17 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2017 07:37:16 -0400
From: Rich Kulawiec <rsk@gsp.org>
To: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: IAOC requesting input on (potential) meeting cities
Message-ID: <20170405113716.GA6511@gsp.org>
References: <149096990336.4276.3480662759931758139.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <9fee9874-1306-07a2-a84a-4e09381a5336@cisco.com> <E67FDB14-9895-48E0-A334-167172D322DB@nohats.ca> <20170403152624.GA11714@gsp.org> <FAF82FC8-58AB-43AA-A094-280EA248E319@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <FAF82FC8-58AB-43AA-A094-280EA248E319@google.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/uubYdHklmSW8VReZ95PTAnHLDBc>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 05 Apr 2017 11:37:19 -0000

On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 05:40:54PM -0700, james woodyatt wrote:
> On Apr 3, 2017, at 08:26, Rich Kulawiec <rsk@gsp.org> wrote:
> > 
> > 	- if the data they provide access to will be retained
> 
> 
> 		- if the data protected by the password will be modified or deleted
> 		- if the software on the protected device will be modified or deleted

You're absolutely right, those should be on the list.  Let me also add
two more.  (1) Given the long, steady, depressing history of massive breaches
of various governments' databases, there is no way to know if passwords
acquired and data siphoned off will be adequately protected.  (2) There's
also no way to know what any enterprising person will independently
choose to do with this veritable goldmine of saleable information --
doubly so given the lack of checks and balances, audits, controls, etc.

---rsk

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email