Re: feedback requested regarding deprecation of TLS 1.0/1.1

[Demi Marie Obenour <demi () invisiblethingslab com>]

On Wed, Aug 07, 2024 at 09:18:28AM -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 8:44 AM Chad Sheridan <chadapsheridan () gmail com> wrote:
> > As a sysadmin, I welcome all of the changes. As far as warnings/alerts, I
> > can safely say, most of our clients don't read them anyway.
> >
> > > Can those machines be put behind a proxy?
> >
> > As for this, of course they can, but some clients will be tied up with so
> > much red tape and budgetary BS that it's a solution that isn't feasible in
> > a reasonable time frame.
>
> ++. Medical devices certified 10 or 15 years ago won't be able to
> pivot as quickly as most people would like. And as I understand
> things, the certifications for medical equipment can be lengthier and
> more expensive than NIST's Cryptographic Module Validation Program.
>
> (It's somewhat amazing how often Windows CE and Windows Mobile crop up
> every now and again).
>
> Jeff

Why does this prevent using a proxy in front of the device?  I mean
something like (patched) stunnel or another generic TLS reterminating
proxy, not something specific to the device.
-- 
Sincerely,
Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)
Invisible Things Lab

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: