That change in attitudes and recommendations hasn't retroactively caused change in software is...well...the state of all human affairs. New APIs are absolutely being denied to HTTP content (see WebCrypro and Service Workers). The TAG will continue to recommend this. Stay tuned for the Finding. Regards On 24 Dec 2014 12:48, "Jeffrey Walton" <noloader@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com> > wrote: > > Which standards bodies are those? Cause the W3C TAG is recommending > > pervasive end-to-end transit encryption. > > W3C and IETF. They may be recommending it, but their deliverables are > failing to meet expectations. > > Jeff > > > On 18 Dec 2014 14:22, "Jeffrey Walton" <noloader@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor > >> <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> wrote: > >> > ... > >> > Four proposed fine-tunings: > >> > > >> > A) i don't think we should remove "This website does not supply > >> > identity information" -- but maybe replace it with "The identity of > this > >> > site is unconfirmed" or "The true identity of this site is unknown" > >> None of them are correct when an interception proxy is involved. All > >> of them lead to a false sense of security. > >> > >> Given the degree to which standard bodies accommodate (promote?) > >> interception, UA's should probably steer clear of making any > >> statements like that if accuracy is a goal. > >> > >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an > >> email to blink-dev+unsubscribe@chromium.org. >
Received on Wednesday, 24 December 2014 22:58:10 UTC