- From: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 21:49:17 +0000
- To: "Frode Kileng" <frodek@tele.no>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <em54ba4e3f-f908-4156-9412-33f49c661879@bodybag>
the concept of forced proxy is mostly I believe being discussed in the context of a corporate network. if your ISP forces you to use a proxy, you may be able to choose another ISP that doesn't if you care enough. Adrien ------ Original Message ------ From: "Frode Kileng" <frodek@tele.no> To: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> Sent: 24/06/2014 9:40:56 a.m. Subject: Who to trust? >On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 4:31 AM, Nicolas Mailhot ><nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net> wrote: >> >>> >From a user point of view a clearly identified local operator they >>>can >>>easily reach physically and which operates on local laws will often >>>be >>>more trustable than a random difficult-to identify site on the other >>>side >>>of the world (that, as shown again and again, will decline any >>>obligation >>>under local laws when put to trial). > >IMHO, care should be taken when generalizing who to trust. I've seen >studies indicating large variations between regions and countries. >Regretfully, the studies are not publicly available. The data doesn't >clarify the reasons for variations but it's easy to come up with >explanations. So although citizens in Canada trusts their ISP more than >your-favorite-browsing-vendor, citizens of North-Korea may have a >different point of view. > >There's also large individual variations. > >A challenge with the "trusted proxy" is that if I don't trust my ISP >and this is an enforced policy, I'm out of options. If I don't trust a >specific browser-vendor, I have many options. > >Frode Kileng >
Received on Monday, 23 June 2014 21:49:50 UTC