http subversion URLs should be discontinued in favor of https URLs

[Steve Clement]

* On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 08:55:00AM +1100, Dewayne Geraghty <dewayne.geraghty at heuristicsystems.com.au> wrote:
> On 6/12/2017 8:13 AM, Yuri wrote:
> > On 12/05/17 13:04, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> >> It is illusion that https is more secure than unencrypted http in a
> >> sense of MITM
> >> just because of encryption, it is not.
> >
> >

Dear all,

Is it really wise suggesting that http is not that bad?

While you are at it, perhaps reviving telnet is a good idea. (Yes it is a
bad comparison)

If your answer is to just not use it, good luck for the past.

> It can be illusory.   My last job was as Sec Mgr for a large bank.  They
> disabled cert checking on client devices, placed a wildcard cert at the
> internet boundary and captured all https unencrypted.  An alternative
> approach to advocate is dnssec.  :)

And you just let this happen under your watch?

> You also need to ensure integrity, to ensure that the numbers are
> flipped in transit...  ;)

As a security person you do have responsibilities. Of course if you (as a
security person) gave up on all that, you might as well go to the beach and
use your CB to talk to your Dr.

I cannot believe these attitudes, can perhaps other people weigh-in,
especially to the issue at hand?

Looking forward to the first person brining up performance issues, in
end-of-2017…

Sincerely yours,

Steve
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/attachments/20171205/e76bcd18/attachment.sig>