Re: Mandatory encryption *is* theater

On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 09:10:16AM +0200, Salvatore Loreto wrote:
> I don't think we were questioning the possibility to speak between 
> client and server
> without any encryption if both parties agree to speak in clear (i.e. TLS 
> is not mandatory to use)
> 
> The hum, at least how I understood it, was only in favor to investigate 
> a way to provide
> from one side equal power to the client:
> i.e. to provide to the client the possibility to require/negotiate the 
> use of encryption;
> and from the other side provide to the client the possibility to 
> discovery the interposition
> and then eventually interact with that proxy in between.

OK, basically a user-chosen STARTTLS that the server can refuse, then
the user decides what to do. It could make sense if everyone in the
chain implements support for at least the clear mode. At least that's
my understanding.

Willy

Received on Sunday, 25 August 2013 07:26:14 UTC