QUIC as a solution to protocol ossification

Posted Feb 2, 2018 23:10 UTC (Fri) by lsl (subscriber, #86508)
In reply to: QUIC as a solution to protocol ossification by nim-nim
Parent article: QUIC as a solution to protocol ossification

> 2. I *have* tried to work with anti-middleware persons to get them fix their implementation of some standards. Their bugs were causing pain to tends of thousands of people that had no beef in the middleware vs non middleware dispute and probably though IT people were collectively dangerous imbeciles. Only to meet obfuscation and evasion, and finally understand the breakage was 100% intentional and they were crippling some use cases and wasting their user's (and sometimes customers') time and energy to push their opinions. Only they would not own up to it and were lying to their users in pretending they had implemented standards when they had sabotaged the parts of them they didn't like, and used it as argument to propose the removal of those parts.

Some specifics would be nice. Are we really talking about bugs or about things like not implementing plaintext downgrades on encrypted protocols? Or making it harder to perform MITM attacks on TLS users thus breaking the "use cases" of ad/garbage injection (loved by mobile ISPs) and other integrity/confidentiality violations of traffic intended to be encrypted and authenticated?