[Cryptography] IAB Statement on Internet Confidentiality

Jerry Leichter leichter at lrw.com
Tue Nov 18 17:46:43 EST 2014

On Nov 18, 2014, at 10:24 AM, John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:
>> However, if you limit it this way, opportunistic encryption has no way to tell you
>> that it's been blocked.  If no one notices attacks, the step forward looks much less
>> dramatic, no?
> Am I really the only person here who is interested in what actually
> happened, as opposed to what hypothetically might happen on some
> non-existent network at some time in the unknown future?
A possible partial answer is at http://ccnpitdaddy.wordpress.com/2009/03/20/smtp-blocked-outbound-esmtptls-fix-asapix/ - some Cisco equipment does this by default.  So the question may have no meaning as applied to the ISP - they may not even know how it works.  There is the question of why Cisco would make such an option the default.  Are customers asking for it?  Or was there no real conscious decision made - it's on by default because that's the way it happened to come out in the code and no one complained.

                                                        -- Jerry

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4813 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20141118/a38fc1c9/attachment.bin>

More information about the cryptography mailing list