@sophieschmieg@infosec.exchange
Post #3544998
2026-07-02 22:27 UTC
Replies (5)
-
@paul_ipv6@infosec.exchange 2026-07-02 23:21
@sophieschmieg@infosec.exchange the IETF doesn't have "votes", right? :D there is just not enough popcorn to be an active IETF participant. :)
-
@felixlinker@infosec.exchange 2026-07-03 06:53
@sophieschmieg@infosec.exchange 👀
-
@mikalai@privacysafe.social 2026-07-04 16:18
@sophieschmieg@infosec.exchange Can we recognize this moment as one noticed in https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1458757 titled "Tussle in cyberspace" In particular, pushing standards is happening now. Are you going to act as Google's agent, focusing on their interest only. Are you going to act as impartial engineer? This isn't politics, and reality-only based actors are expected. Are you using bank site that will implement results of your actions in WG? Is all of your monetary worth in that bank?
-
@neverpanic@chaos.social 2026-07-02 22:46
@sophieschmieg@infosec.exchange This would all be so funny if it weren't a colossal waste of time that could be spent getting stuff out of the door. I'm really hoping we're not going to see a repeat of this shit in, e.g., the SSH WG.
-
@mikalai@privacysafe.social 2026-07-04 16:07
@sophieschmieg@infosec.exchange If it isn't, do you mean that old members will still disregard concerns of those new ones who show up because they feel that WG is mislead into underminning their security? Implication in tonality suggests this.