Hi, On 14 Oct 2013, at 08:47, Tony Rutkowski wrote:
> So as many have opined, the IETF is a > technical standards body, not an evangelical > organization for socio-political views, and > hopefully will continue to do what it > does well - produce usable protocols - and > leave the implementation choices to others > based on their assessment of the risk. Yes, but in doing so, it should provide the ability for the individual users, whether companies or individuals, to mitigate their risks. If technical standards do not include a mandatory option (MTI) of privacy protection they are making a political techno-decsion against privacy. If the Internet cannot be used in a manner that enhances privacy, for those who value privacy, but only maximizes surveillance based security for those who value surveillance, then it looks to me like we are acting evangelically. We can only maintain the belief that our technology and protocols are neutral if they can be used by people of diverse socio-political views. So while I can see problems with MTU, I think genuine MTI (and perhaps some MTU) is needed for privacy enhancements at a level that matches the MTIs and MTUs for security. I technical neutrality requires it. avri
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ perpass mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass
