On 10/07/17 22:26, Russ Housley wrote: > Stephen: > >> And to avoid a repeat of Russ' failed justification, many protocols >> use and depend on TLS where the entity controlling the TLS server >> private key materials is not the higher layer sender or receiver, >> so all four points in the definition in 2804 are fully met by your >> wiretapping scheme. > > It is clear that you do not agree with the reasoning that I posted on > Friday. Some people do, and clearly, others do not. > > So, I failed to convince you. However, you have also failed to > convince me that the proposal is wiretapping under the definition in > RFC 2804, Section 3.
Consider SMTP/TLS. Where one MTA on the path supports this. Say it's one operated by an anti-spam company for example. That is clearly not the sender nor recipient. That meets all 4 points in 2804, right? S. > > Russ > >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
