nanog mailing list archives
Re: Gmail and SSL
From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 23:52:21 -0500
On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 19:59:35 -0800, Damian Menscher said:
Aurora compromised at least 20 other companies, failed at its assumed objective of seeing user data, and Google was the only organization to notice, let alone have the guts to expose the attack [0]. And you're going to hold that against them?
I didn't say that. What I *said* was "one should *expect* a nation-state adversary to go after your mail hosting company via multiple avenues of attack, because it's already been tried before". Google is indeed one of the better actors. But if you're a target, maybe it's time to reconsider whether the phrase "hosting company" should be included in your environment *at all*.
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: Gmail and SSL, (continued)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Christopher Morrow (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Matthew Palmer (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Masataka Ohta (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL George Herbert (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL William Herrin (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Gary E. Miller (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL George Herbert (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Jeff Kell (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Damian Menscher (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Damian Menscher (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 02)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Michael Thomas (Jan 03)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Maxim Khitrov (Jan 03)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Jimmy Hess (Jan 03)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Peter Kristolaitis (Jan 03)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Jay Ashworth (Jan 04)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Matthias Leisi (Jan 03)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Steven Bellovin (Jan 03)
- Re: Gmail and SSL Kyle Creyts (Jan 03)