W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2013

Re: HTTP 2.0 mandatory security vs. Amateur Radio

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 13:26:38 +0800
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <B212B905-3CEE-49DD-B454-3C0E0A6CE310@mnot.net>
To: Bruce Perens <bruce@perens.com>
Just to make sure it’s understood — we’re talking about the common Web browsing use case (most people’s experience of the “open Web”), not other uses of HTTP. Are you saying that people put a network using amateur radio between a browser and “normal” Web sites, thereby disallowing use of https:// URLs?

If so, what do amateur radio operators in this situation do for https:// URIs today?


On 14 Nov 2013, at 1:07 pm, Bruce Perens <bruce@perens.com> wrote:

> Amateur radio, commonly referred to as "ham radio", is prohibited from using encryption to obscure the message content by both international law (an ITU treaty) and its implementations in the national law of most nations. However, we can use encryption thatdoesn't obscure message content for the purposes of authentication. Use of an https URL over an Amateur Radio connection would be a rule violation.
> Although I am well able to discuss the rationale for the prohibition of encryption, that's probably off-topic for this list. Please take it as a given that it's necessary and we like it this way. Anyone who wishes to know more can email me directly.
> Radio Amateurs use wifi-like networks, using 802.11 equipment on its usual frequencies or transverting it to other frequencies, and sometimes with a lot more power than non-licensed users are allowed.
> Although our routers often run OpenWRT or something similar so that we can add ham-specific protcols, we  use off-the-shelf computing equipment, operating systems, and web browsers.
> It would cause us some significant pain if web browsers stopped enabling unencrypted http connections. We'd have to proxy https to http before we allowed the signal on to Amateur frequencies, in order to remain in legal compliance.
> I doubt we're the only people in the world who must, or would rather, have their communications in the clear.
>     Thanks
>     Bruce Perens K6BP

Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Thursday, 14 November 2013 05:27:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:19 UTC