[perpass] commentariat (was: Re: SMTP and SRV records)

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Wed, 25 November 2015 13:56 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: perpass@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: perpass@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 879E61B2CB8 for <perpass@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 05:56:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.886
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.886 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.585, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qB_m3ukYgiFS for <perpass@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 05:56:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 503761B2C58 for <perpass@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 05:56:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82294BE3F; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:56:33 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jFY3XnnzaItQ; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:56:33 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [] (bilbo.dsg.cs.tcd.ie []) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 799DABE39; Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:56:32 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1448459793; bh=ARJU5tGNHxhR0MwL2d08vy1jtwg7qnTOpVM2mcZgzf0=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=VkT/mU0Zs6dgSOUE8l6hTqPU3fHuZcOd/cf8UnofKHL1Kqb25V/fXMAnXw5DsNEZt u34AJ6wY05ZmXvHXmpiWT+R/r5SYwGAV9wlcNI06LM8YH1/LYzcunUoZ8gNWkwMvIx M/EYBBkmkeB2qeJ0WadlZKFJb6l5PpkdFzPsWJKc=
To: Robin Wilton <wilton@isoc.org>, Derek Fawcus <dfawcus+lists-perpass@employees.org>
References: <20151124201103.GA9353@cowbell.employees.org> <5654D5AF.50700@cisco.com> <20151125071128.GA99066@cowbell.employees.org> <6FD77081-7C68-4266-9C26-3443C73F4EFA@trammell.ch> <20151125115248.GA75123@cowbell.employees.org> <5655A3F2.60900@cisco.com> <20151125122713.GC75123@cowbell.employees.org> <7916539D-4001-40AF-8884-6573D1C89ED9@isoc.org>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <5655BE0D.4030706@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:56:29 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7916539D-4001-40AF-8884-6573D1C89ED9@isoc.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Oh7PLTsj4SAt6cLNIx4fQIT1OoxnAHoDK"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/perpass/UpywHFPyqedVxp3xM5QVpdGlZ9A>
Cc: perpass <perpass@ietf.org>
Subject: [perpass] commentariat (was: Re: SMTP and SRV records)
X-BeenThere: perpass@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The perpass list is for IETF discussion of pervasive monitoring. " <perpass.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/perpass>, <mailto:perpass-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/perpass/>
List-Post: <mailto:perpass@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:perpass-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass>, <mailto:perpass-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:56:37 -0000

subject line change...

On 25/11/15 13:28, Robin Wilton wrote:
> I’m sure I’m not the only one who has been depressed by a lot of the
> public discourse on this topic (present list definitely excepted!),
> and the lack of clarity/understanding demonstrated by much of it
> (this being a lamentable case in point:
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/12008689/Why-is-Silicon-Valley-helping-the-tech-savvy-jihadists.html
> ).

While I agree that that kind of article is a pain, it's entirely
predictable, partly understandable but IMO, as it's an attempt to
defy logic and what are basically laws of physics (crytpo is just
math in the end and the rest is a mere matter of programming), it
is also bound to fail, in most places and for most of the time.

We and others have written about why such ideas are wrong,
and will continue to do so, but I don't think we should worry
too much about every single flurry of articles like that. And
there will be such a flurry after every unfortunate or
deplorable incident, as that is also in the nature of things.

But, just to take one example, I'd bet the UK govt will wise up
somewhat when they finally get that they risk exporting their
financial services industry if they muck with crypto in the ways
that article would indicate. (I had a chat with some Irish
industrial dev. types, and that was the angle that most interested


PS: And anyway it's the telegraph - did we expect tech clue? :-)