That's a pretty big stretch.
Work the IETF does could be made illegal in any jurisdiction at any time, either by a court decision or by legislation. Our protocols could be declared illegal due to allowing bad people to communicate using encryption, for example. We can't predict the future with 100% accuracy.
Planning to be able to use more than one external service provider and change over time is basic prudence, but planning for the entire concept of how we might use GitHub to be made illegal in a decision that doesn't also seriously damage the ability for IETF's own tools to be used is not realistic threat modeling.
Bron.
On Wed, Aug 7, 2019, at 01:12, Eliot Lear wrote:
Apropos this very long thread, here’s an article about a lawsuit filed against GitHub for the Capital One break.. The article states that the plaintiffs have their facts muddled, but there’s a good chance that somewhere along the way, there will be a lawsuit that will win, leading to unpredictable changes. This is not an argument to NOT use GH, but rather to simply not abandon our core methods so that we can survive that eventuality.Eliothttps://www.zdnet.com/article/github-sued-for-aiding-hacking-in-capital-one-breach/?fbclid=IwAR2FtQZydp99QlcA859vTGaQo9xXEn3FzP-26Vr9VUrbNE90Pw2OHR36lAwAttachments:
- signature.asc
--
Bron Gondwana, CEO, Fastmail Pty Ltd
brong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
