From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Sun Mar 11 14:05:34 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37030F2BAE7; Sun, 11 Mar 2018 14:05:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pi@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fc.opsec.eu (fc.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200:4::4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C358E6DD9A; Sun, 11 Mar 2018 14:05:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pi@FreeBSD.org) Received: from pi by fc.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.90_1 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1ev1bN-000EnX-Gg; Sun, 11 Mar 2018 15:05:29 +0100 Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2018 15:05:29 +0100 From: Kurt Jaeger To: Alexey Dokuchaev Cc: Bryan Drewery , "Danilo G. Baio" , ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, Eitan Adler Subject: Re: svn commit: r464037 - head/irc/znc Message-ID: <20180311140529.GN15257@fc.opsec.eu> References: <201803100016.w2A0GnR8013646@repo.freebsd.org> <20180310080202.GA18340@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180310080202.GA18340@FreeBSD.org> X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2018 14:05:34 -0000 Hi! > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 05:58:31PM -0800, Bryan Drewery wrote: > > This is a note in general, not specifically at you. But https for > > distfiles only achieves 2 things: 1. Privacy against someone snooping > > that you are downloading ZNC (is it really that important?) but still > > can see your DNS and connections to the ZNC site... and 2. It breaks > > proxy caching. So I don't think MASTER_SITES should be converted to > > https in general. There's this odd push for it lately but I don't see > > the benefit. > > Big +1 (HTTPS for distfiles is somewhat of a PITA for me as well). Can > we please go back to plain good HTTP? SHA256 provides enough assurance > against intermittent tampering with the distfiles. Has anyone really done a review of where things can go wrong if the distfiles are accessed using HTTP-only ? https://citizenlab.ca/2018/03/bad-traffic-sandvines-packetlogic-devices-deploy-government-spyware-turkey-syria/ Until that is the case, HTTPS is at least a little safer than HTTP. -- pi@FreeBSD.org +49 171 3101372 2 years to go !