[Operators] R: Re: IM Observatory @ xmpp.net

Gfa gfa at gnubox.net
Fri Nov 1 14:01:04 UTC 2013


Le 01/11/13 14:02:11, Marco Cirillo a écrit :
> Mark,
>
> Security is not favoritism, you can suitably support 112/128 bits
> ciphers without impacting the grade, using legacy client compatibility
> as an excuse to *still* deploy very weak ciphers or low grade keys,
> can't perhaps be any accepted or be reasoned as a form of favoritism or
> elitism (.. even because even most old systems / clients have support
> for what I mentioned above).
>
> Regards,
> Marco.
>
> P.S. The year is 2013 not 1998.. Maybe it's time to start acting
> according to that.
>
>
> Inviato da Samsung Mobile
>
>
>
> -------- Messaggio originale --------
> Da: Moonchild <moonchild at palemoon.org>
> Data:
> A: XMPP Operators Group <operators at xmpp.org>
> Oggetto: Re: [Operators] IM Observatory @ xmpp.net
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> Although there's some merit to Aryo's suggestions, there's a problem
> with it:
> Most people should primarily be looking for an XMPP server that is in their
> region of the world, not necessarily one that "scores highest". Sorting by
> country/region is therefore preferred.
> The shorter the data transmission paths, the smaller the chance of
> interception of data and the better the overall user experience. In
> addition, XMPP's network gets its strength from being distributed,
>
> In addition, only including score grade "A" is a little short-sighted, IMHO,
> as server operators may be very good admins running a secure server while
> not getting a grade A (for example by offering potentially weaker ciphers
> for extended compatibility with clients - the test seems to pick the lowest
> available to grade servers on). Pushing specific servers to the foreground
> based on their score is a breeding ground for favoritism which I think we
> should avoid.
>
> Kind regards,
>    Mark.
>
>
> On 01/11/2013 08:27, Aryo Sandiyudo wrote:
>  > 1. In my opinion, the list of "Public directory server"
>  > (http://xmpp.net/directory.php) should be displayed sort by score (C2S
>  > and S2S) owned by each server from A to F. 2. Part of the list of "Public
>  > directory server" should be placed next to "Recent Results", located on
>  > the front page and displays randomly say 10 servers that have a score of
>  > A with the "See more" link if a visitor decides to see the full list.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (MingW32)
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSc5+AAAoJEKxqDlWrbd26NOAH/3iqGov+6qZX+t1aTaUL3/bY
> ZSQ5vt8DCPkOwyx5joTEYT+zE5/rxFz2ZWbCrPhZawGlHlQhEiI6/uF8w4z/+BKL
> yp1ACbYitcObBoX26nbV6Cy92tyDIo1eEcnbVgu/COGKdahmycWl0d2igNFbsSjQ
> ptWqxHlE7ctwQfgRThiwbSQBiekezE/Z88pwuLGotNOqxLbKySzyEe3hMtdd8Csl
> 0Q2v+vHkWw3auujl0xGFttD+Rb1hyIGhuQn/M9eRCbn7wjA7cTXpfOe0o57GoD9f
> tNnCJ4RMzvv0Sr5feEMe4JoWiRGb1waRg5M18jz/RAEYHKsAKo3T7FCnkSJO6TQ=
> =5A3A
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

IMHO, there is too many servers scoring A or F.
The marks B,C,D,E could be more used to make this system more useful for 
end-users.
I couldn't believe there is only "bad servers (F)" and "good servers(A)" 
and a very few "(B) almost good"


Regards,
--
Gaël

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2386 bytes
Desc: Signature cryptographique S/MIME
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/operators/attachments/20131101/8993ed4b/attachment.bin>


More information about the Operators mailing list