Re: [Nsaas] Some thoughts about SAAS

Hosnieh Rafiee <> Fri, 29 August 2014 08:03 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 801C81A0679 for <>; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 01:03:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.869
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.869 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p8af25FC2Bkl for <>; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 01:03:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B92A1A013B for <>; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 01:03:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (EHLO ([]) by (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BIV92530; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 08:03:56 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from ([fe80::b810:863:a57e:3ff]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 09:03:48 +0100
From: Hosnieh Rafiee <>
To: Linda Dunbar <>
Thread-Topic: Some thoughts about SAAS
Thread-Index: Ac/C2aY9o39tM7ggQpS6YIhOHJvDogAJnMqQABe+/BA=
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 08:03:48 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645DDDC3E@dfweml701-chm>
In-Reply-To: <4A95BA014132FF49AE685FAB4B9F17F645DDDC3E@dfweml701-chm>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [Nsaas] Some thoughts about SAAS
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "*NSaaS: Network Security as a Service mailing list*" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 08:04:02 -0000


> Are you saying having a way for customers to avoid being monitored by
> government?

Both government or any other surveillance agents.

> I can see the potential for customers to be notified when their traffic
> is actually monitored. But if government wants to monitor someone, can
> you avoid?

The answer is really difficult. But this raises the next questions that are whether or not this impacts on the standards? Whether or not it leads to having each country follow certain specifications and again there is problem for operators to offer service to customers or force to be limited to the service offered by their own country? Isn't it difficult to think about a unified framework?