Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: Re: [LINK] Calling time on DNSSEC? Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 06:14:06 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 10 Message-ID: References: <67464f37@news.ausics.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2024 07:14:06 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c96be26192a45ce8d8c08f341d719685"; logging-data="4097699"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/y1wgebCCL+VkQednJMDsm" User-Agent: Pan/0.161 (Chasiv Yar; ) Cancel-Lock: sha1:rxwzAAqAkYYr2LC5xijzEiXSQSw= Bytes: 1590 On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 08:52:31 +0000, Richard Kettlewell wrote: > DNS + TLS does solve it, sufficiently well. (Using TLS to include > Internet PKI.) Nobody uses PKI. TLS has a hole in it, in that the SNI, “Server Name Indication” (the “Host:” line in the HTTP request header) has to be sent unencrypted. This allows eavesdroppers, like authoritarian Government regimes, to determine when you are trying to access a prohibited service, and block it before the encrypted connection can be set up.