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

Re: Pervasive encryption: Pro and contra

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 08:16:16 +0000
To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <55864.1384676176@critter.freebsd.dk>
In message <CAHBU6is_KHGHTDeh31vZCVGZtQpuqNQr5NJtsGfsQ7As2G3jRw@mail.gmail.com>
, Tim Bray writes:

>To help sort things out in my own mind, I just went and read the last few
>hundred messages and attempted to curate the pervasive/mandatory encryption
>arguments, pro and contra.  It's in a Google doc that's open to comment by
>anyone: http://goo.gl/6yhpC1  Hm, is there a handy wiki platform somewhere
>that can stand up to the pressure?

It's a good topline summary.

I would add:

C6.5:  Pervasive encryption will be defeated by the agencies tasked with
       performing pervasive surveillance:  It's their job.

C6.6:  Pervasive encryption runs a very big risk of being out-lawed, if
       it makes pervasive surveillance impossible.

(And before any USAnians flash the "1st ammendment" card:  Yes, you
have a constitutional right to say any damn thing you want, but not
to encrypt it, in particular not if the "national security" flag
is waved.)

Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Sunday, 17 November 2013 08:16:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:20 UTC