Re: [perpass] Violating end-to-end principle: I-D Action: draft-farrelll-mpls-opportunistic-encrypt-00.txt

[Theodore Ts'o <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 09:57:07AM -0500, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> End to end ideology in security is particularly harmful because there are
> some security controls that are simply not compatible with end-to-end
> approaches. You cannot protect against traffic or meta-data analysis
> end-to-end.

That may be true, but the alternative of edge-to-edge security is even
worse.  Edge-to-edge security also doesn't protect against traffic or
meta-data analysis, and upon receipt of a National Security Letter to
your IMAP provider, doesn't protect the contents of your e-mail,
either.

So I don't see how claiming that striving for end-to-end security is
"harmful".

Best,

		    	     	     	     - Ted