On Nov 20, 2013, at 6:19 PM, joel jaeggli <[email protected]> wrote: > bad actor is a value judgement. have no doubt that the intent of > surveillance is hostile with respect to the assumputions of the privacy > of one's communications.
It's a lot softer to say "we have to treat passive surveillance as an attack because there is no way to distinguish between cases where it is and is not an attack" than it is to say "passive surveillance is an attack." The document goes to some lengths not to examine the motivation of the eavesdropper, so finding a better term than "bad actor" makes sense to me. _______________________________________________ perpass mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass
