You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
These standards are being actively worked on and aren't finished yet. They will be by around end of the year. Once they are RFCs and implemented in software, we should support these. Hence: we need to start thinking now about how we transition users from our current approach to these new security standards once they're deployment-ready.
I'm looking for comments, especially from @pde as he's intimately familiar with Certbot.
Aaron
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
azet
changed the title
Transitioning to IETF MTA-MTA and supporting DEEP standards
Transitioning to IETF MTA-MTA security standards and supporting DEEP
Apr 29, 2016
azet
changed the title
Transitioning to IETF MTA-MTA security standards and supporting DEEP
Future transition to IETF MTA-MTA security standards and supporting DEEP
Apr 29, 2016
There's a great comment by @jgillula on #88 about what we think re: transitioning to MTA-STS support.
Once they are RFCs and implemented in software, we should support these.
Although they're RFCs now, they're not yet implemented in software, with no clear timelines from major email providers and no strong commitments from Postfix or Exim either.
Hi,
There's currently a lot of work being done within UTA ("Utilising TLS in applications" - https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/uta/documents) regarding mail security.
Strong contenders are:
These standards are being actively worked on and aren't finished yet. They will be by around end of the year. Once they are RFCs and implemented in software, we should support these. Hence: we need to start thinking now about how we transition users from our current approach to these new security standards once they're deployment-ready.
I'm looking for comments, especially from @pde as he's intimately familiar with Certbot.
Aaron
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: