[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> I'm sorry but I bring along previous discussion baggage. Let me > explain. You were asking about removing HTTP access due to the > arguments of the problem of MITM attacks. Actually I forwarded a message where someone else warned about that. I myself don't know what the scenario is. That's why I don't have an opinion, myself. > MITM attacks are of ultimate concern, so goes the usual discussion, > therefore unencrypted access must be actively blocked in order to > protect everyone from all MITM security threats. That argument seems valid, regarding unencrypted access that _can be used to do a MITM attack_. How does HTTP on Savannah make possible a MITM attack? Ineiev's point seems valid: > FTP and cvs pserver are harder to use for compromising Savannah accounts, > aren't they? I think it would be wise to look at the question first regarding HTTP. Then, having reached a conclusion based on some reasoning, try applying the same reasoning to the case of FTP and see what conclusion it leads to. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org) Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.
