Re: [lamps] S/MIME fix

[Russ Housley <[e-mail]>]

{ RETRANSMISSION due to the short mail list outage yesterday. }

Ryan:

It seems to me that the LAMPS WG should say something about how to avoid the eFail attack in the Security Considerations of draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5751.

Russ


> On May 17, 2018, at 2:53 PM, Ryan Sleevi <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
> I'm having trouble understanding how the current discussion relates to the LAMPS work. It sounds from Phil's initial message, is that this isn't related to LAMPS. There's been suggestions that this might be the CA/Browser Forum (despite the CA/Browser Forum not even having a proposed charter to clean this up), that this might be a W3C/WHATWG issue (despite the browsers explicitly rejecting some of these proposals), or perhaps somewhere else.
> 
> For my own understanding, is there a concrete proposal for either a document or work LAMPS should take on? Otherwise, would it be better to have this discussion elsewhere?
> 
> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Adam Roach <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> On 5/17/18 10:46 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>> I am composing this in Gmail right now. And there is my outlook client in the window underneath. ​The Web browser is not just a full fledged email client, it is the client of choice.
> 
> I don't want to get too far down the rabbit hole of semantics here, but claiming that a browser is an email client because it can run Gmail is fully congruent with claiming your operating system is an email client because it can run Outlook.
> 
> More to the point: you know what I meant.
> 
> /a
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Spasm mailing list
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm>
> 
>