Re: [plasma] Security Boundary Inspection - outgoing messages

"Jim Schaad" <jimsch@nwlink.com> Sat, 06 August 2011 05:26 UTC

Return-Path: <jimsch@nwlink.com>
X-Original-To: plasma@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: plasma@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E49F621F874B for <plasma@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 22:26:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HUqKx5duTFIP for <plasma@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 22:26:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp1.pacifier.net (smtp1.pacifier.net [64.255.237.171]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA4621F874A for <plasma@ietf.org>; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 22:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from TITUS (173-160-230-153-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.160.230.153]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp1.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E0CA2CA3E; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 22:26:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Jim Schaad" <jimsch@nwlink.com>
To: "'Fitch, Scott C'" <scott.c.fitch@lmco.com>, <plasma@ietf.org>
References: <3AED781EC260354F87ADB219D005398748CE6E4076@HVXMSP1.us.lmco.com>
In-Reply-To: <3AED781EC260354F87ADB219D005398748CE6E4076@HVXMSP1.us.lmco.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 22:59:43 -0700
Message-ID: <01b401cc53fe$32ea0d60$98be2820$@nwlink.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQEZIJHBH4p619w8LwMxiZ58fbHzTZZ1urfw
Content-Language: en-us
Subject: Re: [plasma] Security Boundary Inspection - outgoing messages
X-BeenThere: plasma@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The PoLicy Augmented S/Mime \(plasma\) bof discussion list." <plasma.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/plasma>, <mailto:plasma-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/plasma>
List-Post: <mailto:plasma@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:plasma-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma>, <mailto:plasma-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Aug 2011 05:26:20 -0000

Do you feel this needs to be a separate scenario, or can we just include it
as part of the current e-mail pipelineing section and discussion transitions
across boundaries in both directionsl

Jim


> -----Original Message-----
> From: plasma-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:plasma-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Fitch, Scott C
> Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 1:38 PM
> To: plasma@ietf.org
> Subject: [plasma] Security Boundary Inspection - outgoing messages
> 
> A scenario that is missing from the v02 of the document is the ability to
scan
> outgoing messages. Plasma offers a huge improvement over current S/MIME
> implementations. This capability is definitely of interest to
organizations who
> want to know what information is leaving their security boundaries via
email.
> I recommend adding it as an additional scenario to the document and would
> be willing to help write it up if needed.
> 
> 
> Scott Fitch
> Cyber Architect
> Lockheed Martin Enterprise Business Services
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> plasma mailing list
> plasma@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma