- From: Yoav Nir <synp71@live.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 23:28:25 +0200
- To: Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net>, "William Chan (陈智昌)" <willchan@chromium.org>
- CC: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP3096A4033AFA4B1B1ACEFF3B1D50@phx.gbl>
On 3/12/13 10:00 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le Mar 3 décembre 2013 19:53, William Chan (陈智昌) a écrit : > >>> On 3/12/13 3:16 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: >>> >>>> Le Mar 3 décembre 2013 12:24, Yoav Nir a écrit : >>>> >>>> >>>> 5. Prompt the user: >>>> >>>> Accept using gateway-name to access http://awebsite.com/ and other web >>>> sites in ingoing-http2-mode ? >>>> >>>> [check reformatted access rules] [see help page] [see certificate] >>>> >>>> [ ] Prompt for other web sites and security modes >>>> ( ) only for this session ( ) all the time >>>> (*) only from here ( ) everywhere >>>> [Yes] [No] >> <pushback> >> I can probably expect to be tarred and feathered by my security team if I >> tell them we need to put up a UI asking the end user to make a decision >> about security :) >> </pushback> > Then simplify the prompt to > > Access to http://awebsite.com/ requires using gateway-name on this network. > gateway-name may read some of your traffic. Do you want to proceed ? > <link to advanced info> > <yes> <no> Simplification doesn't help. The user is in the middle of doing something, and they're not going to take their mind off the task at hand to answer your questions. > > The only decision the user needs to make is if he's in a location where > gateway-name is expecter and if he accepts exposing his traffic. Not everyone has expectations regarding the presence or absence of proxies. Only a few would be able to make a good guess as to why the proxy is even there (scan for malware? Cache? scan for subversives?) > That will > usually be a no-brainer (ok if at hotel, corp, school, nok at home unless > the proxy is user-deployed). Guess it's not a no-brainer, because I would not be OK with a decrypting proxy at a hotel, coffee shop, or airport. > And you only need to remind him the gateway > is in use next time it's encountered via a transient message, in case it > occurs in an unexpected place, the user wants to rescind the permission or > he's in private browsing mode. (display gateway name and encryption > status) "Your traffic to mail.google.com is being decrypted by sslproxy.example.com". Good, bad, or indifferent?
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Tuesday, 3 December 2013 21:28:56 UTC