Post #3474807

2026-06-29 08:16 UTC

NSA lost IETF's February 2026 vote on this NSA-driven document. See https://blog.cr.yp.to/20260405-votes.html for tallies. Do they admit what happened? No. They call another vote and try hard to pack the room with new pro-NSA voters. But if we show up and object, all they can do is whimper.

Replies (2)

@letoams@defcon.social 2026-07-02 03:00

@djb@mastodon.cr.yp.to note this exact strategy was attempted by the vendors who didn’t want TLS 1.3 to happen because ephemeral key exchanges were made mandatory in TLS 1.3 ruining their network monitoring capabilities. They sent lots of people to try and block TLS 1.3, but the attempts didn’t work. The IETF has experience with people sending sockpuppets. It is sad to see you attempt a similar strategy.

Open ##3579778
@mikalai@privacysafe.social 2026-07-04 13:59

@djb@mastodon.cr.yp.to want to bring attention of @pluralistic@mamot.fr and @eff@mastodon.social Re-voting of issue scheduled in summer of most(all) nays of the first vote. Meat: attempt to drop hybrid scheme with two locks, post-quantum + proven-ecc/non-pq. Signal uses this approach. With IETF recomendation there will be pressure on them to drop proven encryption parts. I mean, cute way to score in crypto war no.2.

Open ##3581120