W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: multiplexing -- don't do it

From: Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net>
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 17:52:09 +0200
Message-ID: <806838f53dc8d5f2b26c29a1d8690e4d.squirrel@arekh.dyndns.org>
To: "Mike Belshe" <mike@belshe.com>
Cc: "Nicolas Mailhot" <nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net>, "William Chan (陈智昌)" <willchan@chromium.org>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org

Le Ven 6 avril 2012 17:34, Mike Belshe a écrit :
> Once again - the people arguing against encryption are the people that want
> to exploit the user's data transmission stream for their own personal gain.
>
> If we want the Internet to be protect users - encrypt it.
>
> If we want the Internet to be an enabler to vendors that want to
> change/alter/slow down/trick users into seeing their content, buying their
> products, etc, then don't.
>
> It's a simple choice:  users vs interceptors.

It's not.

On a corporation network the users are employees. Their employer does not owe
them unlimited access to facebook, youtube or various porn sites.

If filtering those breaks other network accesses because someone made war on
'interceptors' it's not the corporation which will be punished it's the
end-users trying to work through this breakage.

If their workstation breaks down because it got infected they won't thank you
for disabling the network antivirus gateway. In fact if the BYOD craze
succeeds, not only they will have to meet objectives despite computer
breakdown, but they'll also have to fix their computer themselves.

So may it result in some privacy loss? Maybe (though I'm sure most
corporations would be happy not to look at a user webmail or bank as long as
they could filter most of the rest). Do users care?  Facebook success says
they don't.

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
Received on Friday, 6 April 2012 15:52:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:59 GMT