On Wed 2017-05-10 12:12:34 -0700, Christian Huitema wrote:
> It certainly was. But then the clear text SNI is a gaping privacy hole
> in TLS, the kind of issue that should keep us awake at night until it is
> resolved. We need to make sure that we make progress, rather than rehash
> the old arguments. Maybe we should invest some time and document the
> various proposals in a draft. I am willing to work on that. Any other
> volunteers?
I agree with Christian's assessment of the problem, and i'd be
interested in collaborating on such a draft.
The DNS folks are making strides to protect name information (the other
main place where this kind of data is leaking). TLS needs to keep up.
--dkg
_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
