[Freedombox-discuss] Two days left on your PageKite account ??

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

On 06/24/2012 05:33 PM, Matthias-Christian Ott wrote:
> On 2012-06-24 22:49, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>> That said, i'd like to point out that your concerns about provider
>> control of your persistent address are *exactly* why we need a common
>> naming scheme that doesn't encourage this kind of hierarchy.
> 
> For security you don't need to have this. Encryption and authentication
> is performed end-to-end.

Yes, end-to-end authentication is good.  My point was that Marc's
complaint was that he had been in the habit of publishing (and his
readers/listeners had recorded) a *name* of his service that is
subordinate to (hierarchically controlled and managed by) the provider.

The provider was asking for a fee for service (a reasonable request,
imho), but could also have used the leverage provided by name control to
impose much more onerous constraints, based on the threat of losing an
established name.

If Bjarni takes the name away, all the end-to-end encryption in the
world won't help Marc's readers/listeners find the service again.

	--dkg

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1030 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20120624/ca323ec0/attachment.pgp>