Joel,
On Oct 14, 2013, at 8:01 AM, Ralf Skyper Kaiser <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
I understand the goal of making life harder for state surveillance.
However, I am not willing (personally) to incur any degraded user experience,
premature cell phone battery depletion, etc in order to support this goal.
I suspect, but cannot prove, that most users would express similar feelings.
the browser/CA transition from 1024 to 2048 bit certs is ongoing albiet done
soon. That's a cost that everyone is paying for whether they know it or not… We
therefore have an internet scale existence proof.
Which RFC mandated this? My guess is NONE.
This represents a decision by a set of CAs and browser vendors, external
to the
IETF, to improve security. That's fine, but it is also not
representative of many
of the suggested mechanisms that have been proposed on this list, by
some folks.
Steve
_______________________________________________
perpass mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass
