Re: Mandatory encryption from Tim Bray on 2012-07-18 (ietf-http-wg@w3.org from July to September 2012)

From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 08:09:23 -0700
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Cc: Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@gmail.com>, grahame@healthintersections.com.au, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CAHBU6iuAZk8eiYoa_Fi+Y_rQAqkPQ_tLQ_mH2zo1-mnNXLfxfA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> wrote:
>> Show me the user that will stand up and say, "Yes, I would like my
>> communications to be snoopable and changeable by 3rd parties without my
>> knowledge."
>
>
> This is a red herring.  The real argument is around the ability of all web
> servers to get certificates

This pattern keeps coming up.
A: “Privacy is good”
B: “No, because the technology is currently too expensive/unreliable”

Uh... privacy is good.  -T

Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2012 15:09:55 UTC