Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:101564
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ohgaki.net designates 180.42.98.130 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAF+90c8j8G6QBTkhw8dqUiqLjQTuUqOFfCsTo_G6wgK40_JXMQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF+90c8j8G6QBTkhw8dqUiqLjQTuUqOFfCsTo_G6wgK40_JXMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2018 23:01:48 +0900
Message-ID: <CAGa2bXZu=3qdY8+G_A=HydCF7xZNn0deCWD35PPQWrJtHpFc5g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>
Cc: systems@php.net, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c034a86d7dee70562302192"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Mailing list moderation
From: yohgaki@ohgaki.net (Yasuo Ohgaki)

--94eb2c034a86d7dee70562302192
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Hi Nikita,

On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 7:49 PM, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This mail is going to both the systems group and internals mailing list.
>
> I would like to request a mailing list suspension for the users
> tonymarston@hotmail.com and lists@rhsoft.net, who have recently been
> aggressively derailing the "Scalar Pseudo-type" thread, despite requests to
> moderate their participation both in that thread, and on a number of
> previous instances -- this is certainly not the first time these two users
> have converted an RFC discussion into a dick measuring contest.
>
> If these users cannot be suspended, I would like to request specific
> instructions under what circumstances users can be suspended from the
> internals list, and what procedures need to be followed to achieve this.
>
> Regards,
> Nikita
>

At first, I don't understand at all what the issue here at all.
However, I'm -1 on this in general.

Who are going to decide what kind of discussion is correct or wrong?

The last discussion with you about HKDF was total nonsense.
I think you are great programmer, but you were ignorant  regarding secure
key derivations. You don't even know what FS (Forward Secrecy), nor PFS
(Perfect Forward Secrecy) that are very basic idea for secure key
derivations.
Without FS, it is considered very vulnerable today. PFS is mandatory for
many
applications. i.e. Slat parameter must be the 1st tional parameter at
least, or
better, it should be a required parameter.

I might be +1 depending on the behavior, but -1 as long as their attitude
is acceptable.

Regards,

--
Yasuo Ohgaki
yohgaki@ohgaki.net

--94eb2c034a86d7dee70562302192--