- From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
- Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 23:43:02 +0200 (CEST)
- To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
- cc: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, 6 Aug 2012, Stephen Farrell wrote: > The tls WG was offered that option again last week and rejected it again. If > the httpbis WG want to standardise some kind of mitm without changing TLS > then that seems to re-define https to me at least. I strongly agree. MITM proxies are not defined elements of a TLS infrastructure and legitimizing them would redefine HTTPS to me. They are hacks or attacks or whatever we should call them. -- / daniel.haxx.se
Received on Monday, 6 August 2012 21:43:56 UTC