Hugo Slabbert wrote:
> On Tue 2015-Jun-30 01:04:48 +0200, Michelle Sullivan
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> That said, so far today, only 0.015% of our outbound messages that
>>> were over an encrypted link were using SSLv3.   At our volume, that's
>>> not nothing, unfortunately, but it's a pretty small amount to allow to
>>> continue to allow the possibility of breaking the rest.  TLSv1 is
>>> still about 5%, way too high to deprecate at this point.
>>>
>>> Inbound is 0.1% at SSLv3, 37% at TLSv1.
>> So +60% is unencrypted inbound... because it has to be or because it is
>> not forced otherwise... that is the burning question.  You policy
>> Encrypted or nothing and it'll be interesting how many cope and how many
>> don't...
>
> Just to be clear:  It sounds like you're talking about a scenario
> where Google would require TLS inbound and possibly outbound and
> refusing *any* cleartext delivery.  Is that right?  Correct me if I'm
> wrong, but I don't believe Brandon's said anything to that effect.

I got the impression that was exactly what was being proposed.

> Any discussion so far has been about "if STARTTLS && ( DHE -le 512 )
> then disconnect", possibly/probably with DANE in the mix as well and
> refusing to fall back to clear if STARTTLS is initiated but fails to
> negotiate,
This I have no problem with... it makes good sense.

Michelle

-- 
Michelle Sullivan
http://www.mhix.org/


_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
[email protected]
http://chilli.nosignal.org/mailman/listinfo/mailop

Reply via email to