[Discuss] root CA bloat

[Richard Pieri]

On 11/23/2014 3:26 AM, Bill Bogstad wrote:
> If they did something that Microsoft hadn't requested then I'm pretty
> sure somebody would both notice AND care.  This is all in the context
> of attacking the security of Internet communications via a MITM
> attack.   If Microsoft (one of the two parties communicating
> in this example) authorized it, then it isn't MITM.   Whether it

Ahh. I see what you mean, now. Your argument, that because Microsoft 
/did/ authorize MarkMonitor to act as an intermediary makes any 
interception not MITM since it's not an unauthorized party listening in, 
has merit. But then, the NSA is authorized by law to do the same thing. 
Right now, almost the entirety of Internet communications is controlled 
by a handful of corporate entities which have even more power than the 
NSA to eavesdrop on communications.

The biggest concern that I have isn't that MarkMonitor and its 
competitors will eavesdrop. It's that they'll receive national security 
letters ordering them to shut everything down.

-- 
Rich P.