Re: [TLS] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-moriarty-tls-oldversions-diediedie-00.txt

Good day! On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 3:01 AM Stephen Farrell wrote: > 1. The bit you quote above is incomplete Yep, but the rest of the paragraph just outlines *recommendations* (or, even better, 'encouragements') while the draft states that "PCI Council [is] deprecating TLSv1.0 and TLSv1.1 by

Re: [TLS] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-moriarty-tls-oldversions-diediedie-00.txt

On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 7:42 PM Kathleen Moriarty wrote: > Stephen and I posted the draft below to see if the TLS working group > is ready to take steps to deprecate TLSv1.0 and TLSv1.1. There has > been a recent drop off in usage for web applications due to the PCI > Council recommendation to

Re: [TLS] WG adoption call: draft-moriarty-tls-oldversions-diediedie

I support the adoption. | Artyom Gavrichenkov | gpg: 2deb 97b1 0a3c 151d b67f 1ee5 00e7 94bc 4d08 9191 | mailto: xima...@gmail.com | fb: ximaera | telegram: xima_era | skype: xima_era | tel. no: +7 916 515 49 58 On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 8:33 PM Sean Turner wrote: > > At the TLS@IETF102 s

Re: [TLS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tls-sni-encryption-03.txt

any way different from just an arbitrary ISP. I support removal of this case, it's virtually impossible to protect against it. | Artyom Gavrichenkov | gpg: 2deb 97b1 0a3c 151d b67f 1ee5 00e7 94bc 4d08 9191 | mailto: xima...@gmail.com | fb: ximaera | telegram: xima_era | skype: xima_era | tel. no

Re: [TLS] Breaking into TLS to protect customers

Are we going to discuss draft-fenter ad hoc, or we'll start a new thread dedicated to that? Because I strongly believe I also have some suggestions for that draft. ср, 14 мар. 2018 г., 23:30 Salz, Rich : > Some on this list have said that they need to break into TLS in order to

Re: [TLS] TLS@IETF101 Agenda Posted

14 Mar. 2018 г., 22:32 Ralph Droms <rdroms.i...@gmail.com>: > > On Mar 13, 2018, at 7:45 PM, Artyom Gavrichenkov <xima...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > 13 Mar. 2018 г., 18:38 Ted Lemon <mel...@fugue.com>: > >> One strategy that's very effective for overco

Re: [TLS] TLS@IETF101 Agenda Posted

my daughter, "if you > hear hoof beats, it is likely not a zebra, it is a horse". > > The simple explanation is that people think they will have serious issues > with TLS1.3 and actually, TLS1.2 when it is DH only. > > Nalini > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:45 PM, Artyom Gavric

Re: [TLS] TLS@IETF101 Agenda Posted

13 Mar. 2018 г., 18:38 Ted Lemon : > One strategy that's very effective for overcoming resistance to bad ideas > is to keep pushing the idea until nobody who's resisting it can afford to > continue doing so. > There's a name for that tactics, it's called "consensus by

Re: [TLS] TLS@IETF101 Agenda Posted

ompartmentalization issue is not addressed properly in draft-fenter. Because simply stating that "typically, only select groups within an organization [are able to see decrypted traffic]" doesn't seem enough. (this is just a single example of an issue with that draft) | Artyom Gavrich

Re: [TLS] TLS@IETF101 Agenda Posted

for anyone? вт, 13 мар. 2018 г., 13:39 Sean Turner <s...@sn3rd.com>: > > > > On Mar 13, 2018, at 16:31, Artyom Gavrichenkov <xima...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi Nalini, > > > > вт, 13 мар. 2018 г., 11:59 nalini elkins <nalini.elk...@e-dco.com>: &

Re: [TLS] TLS@IETF101 Agenda Posted

Hi Nalini, вт, 13 мар. 2018 г., 11:59 nalini elkins : > The TLS working group has been concentrating on making the Internet secure > for the individual user.We feel that there is also an underlying > motivation to help the underdog and protect the political

Re: [TLS] TLS@IETF101 Agenda Posted

Hi Darin, I just asked for clarification whether it's on a TLS WG agenda for London. I'm not quite sure this is a right thread to discuss the contents of that draft. (In fact, I'm pretty sire it isn't.) | Artyom Gavrichenkov | gpg: 2deb 97b1 0a3c 151d b67f 1ee5 00e7 94bc 4d08 9191 | mailto: xima