[WIMSE] Re: Follow-up of meeting 122 presentation (Formal proof of insecurity of Intel's RA-TLS and draft-fossati-tls-attestation)

[Muhammad Usama Sardar <[e-mail]>]

For record, rather than repetition, I will respond in this thread only 
when I will see some new argument. What's been said is not acceptable to 
me and I stay in strong opposition of architecture draft (including 
John's recent PR).

John, answer to your question inline:

On 31.12.25 14:34, John Kemp wrote:
> 4. Have you submitted your concerns to the RATS WG - 
Yes, it was presented at RATS and pre-print was share recently [0].
> that would seem more appropriate than here since there is at least a 
> RATS draft on attested TLS specifically [fossati-09]?

If you carefully see the name of the draft [fossati-09], it was intended 
for TLS WG and not RATS WG. TLS WG was already informed about it in 
February [1].

-Usama

>
> [fossati-09] 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-fossati-tls-attestation/

[0] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rats/sLHnWMqKg2Jwu403vpgCIaVOYdE/

[1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/Jx_yPoYWMIKaqXmPsytKZBDq23o/