Re: [TLS] The risk of misconfiguration

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Thu, 08 May 2014 17:03 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F3B11A00D7 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 May 2014 10:03:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.251
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.251 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham
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 VMflqrOMm1mq for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 May 2014 10:03:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8E1A1A00D3 for <tls@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 May 2014 10:03:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF928BE51; Thu, 8 May 2014 18:03:25 +0100 (IST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O7uyEw1zaUFf; Thu, 8 May 2014 18:03:24 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [190.112.52.71] (unknown [190.112.52.71]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C754DBE47; Thu, 8 May 2014 18:03:23 +0100 (IST)
Message-ID: <536BB8D9.90208@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 18:03:21 +0100
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <mpg@polarssl.org>, Alyssa Rowan <akr@akr.io>, tls@ietf.org
References: <CACsn0cnvV9c5aH5p8cD1fJEzF4dmNXBaEaHCfkX82AZqKOUYaQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAK3OfOgYr7d88iuxhXZcos55ymg0i_Q_GHNcXB+w7GRUaEj0bw@mail.gmail.com> <536A67D9.2070302@pobox.com> <CAK3OfOjTehkbKMg40_ZXGXOVjyHHY7UrxLmpyr7Mz00rRo+RLQ@mail.gmail.com> <536A6F8C.7020702@akr.io> <536B401E.8070502@polarssl.org>
In-Reply-To: <536B401E.8070502@polarssl.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/QLd6He2tAFY3OFjLLYIREZEeslQ
Subject: Re: [TLS] The risk of misconfiguration
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 17:03:37 -0000


On 08/05/14 09:28, Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard wrote:
> Side note: it seems to me that perpass is short for pervasive passive
> (surveillance).

I wouldn't sweat about that term. Its just the imperfect name
I made up for a mailing list back last summer. It does get used
sometimes as a shorthand when we probably would be better saying
something longer that uses the term pervasive monitoring, (which
is not just passive as you point out) but that's ok for list
discussion.

S.