On Sep 10, 2013, at 1:55 PM, Theodore Ts'o <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Also, perfect forward secrecy (PFS) versus non-PFS.  If we are going
> to make encryption a SHOULD or a MUST, so should be PFS.  Even if the
> key management is a problem, or worse, let's suppose the NSA has the
> private keys for a number of the major CA's, if everything is using
> PFS, then an attacker who is interested in doing bulk surveillance
> will have to MITM all of the traffic.  That will take a large amount
> of power and cooling, so it becomes a lot more expensive to do bulk
> surveillance, and it will also be much, MUCH harder to do it covertly
> (you can't just hide a box in a telephone closet somewhere; but rather
> racks and racks of servers at Tier 1 NAP's will be required).

Sounds reasonable.

--
Dean

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

_______________________________________________
perpass mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass

Reply via email to