IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [saag] keys under doormats: is our doormat ok?

Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> Sun, 12 July 2015 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <simon@josefsson.org>
X-Original-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: saag@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0195B1ACEE9 for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Jul 2015 08:02:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.149
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BIxplZJGkdS8 for <saag@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Jul 2015 08:02:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from duva.sjd.se (duva.sjd.se [IPv6:2001:9b0:1:1702::100]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5AE611ACEE5 for <saag@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Jul 2015 08:02:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from latte.josefsson.org ([155.4.17.3]) (authenticated bits=0) by duva.sjd.se (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4) with ESMTP id t6CF2I85024300 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Sun, 12 Jul 2015 17:02:20 +0200
From: Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <55A26484.7050807@cs.tcd.ie>
OpenPGP: id=54265E8C; url=http://josefsson.org/54265e8c.txt
X-Hashcash: 1:22:150712:stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie::ajM+ET8KjR0OUXPs:5Zc
X-Hashcash: 1:22:150712:saag@ietf.org::BTibI+aJS62EcEdQ:X5h1
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 17:02:17 +0200
In-Reply-To: <55A26484.7050807@cs.tcd.ie> (Stephen Farrell's message of "Sun, 12 Jul 2015 13:58:44 +0100")
Message-ID: <87fv4ts9l2.fsf@latte.josefsson.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.130014 (Ma Gnus v0.14) Emacs/24.4 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.7 at duva.sjd.se
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/saag/DE9sxsxKh4vHCSg5KmhcQR4rH2I>
Cc: "saag@ietf.org" <saag@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [saag] keys under doormats: is our doormat ok?
X-BeenThere: saag@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Advisory Group <saag.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/saag/>
List-Post: <mailto:saag@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/saag>, <mailto:saag-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 15:02:34 -0000

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> writes:

> Hiya,
>
> I'm sure a bunch of you have seen [1] and various reports of
> potential government silliness that presumably prompted that.
> So I just re-read RFC1984 [2] and I think it still does a good
> enough job of setting out the IETF's position on the topic.
>
> Since that RFC is almost 20 years old, I thought I'd check on
> here if folks think anything more needs to be done in the IETF.
> If there were, then it'd be timely to talk about that in Prague.
>
> However, I think we're ok already thanks to RFC1984 but please
> do say if you think something more needs to be done in the IETF.

The document is sometimes dismissed as being almost 20 years old, and
that it does not reflect current consensus among IAB/IESG.  Revising the
document (with as little changes as possible) and getting that approved
again would be useful, in my mind.

/Simon

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email