Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Make TLS Optional (#4260)

[Karthik Kumar Viswanathan <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ted,

Thank you for the explanation. I just felt that the points on having middle systems and proxies currently exists today, with edge devices, CDNs, layer 7bload balancer and reverse proxies, and only ends up adding a layer of encryption and decryption at each step. While this is perfect for secrecy, it fails to account for the I numerous websites powering our internet, which are not single monolithic systems by themselves.

Besides, TLS itself relying on trusting the certificates of many providers including the government and some ISPs still makes it easier for a rogue actor to snoop on one's privacy today.

The other factors to ideally consider would be the time needed to recieve multiple wireless packets over the wire and enable decryption them, preferably with quantum resistant curve algorithms (or some such) which only amplifies the amount of money thrown at the problem, not necessarily enabling more people to use this otherwise well engineered protocol.

Hence I made the suggestion was to make it optional, and that the people who will perform the complete deployment of a system may choose the right points to enable the usage of such privacy, as need rises.

 I know this wasn't the original design goal, hence I request the folks to consider,possibly for the future, having a way to define this mechanism in the wire.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/4260#issuecomment-714801719