Last Call Review of draft-ietf-qresync-rfc5162bis-09
review-ietf-qresync-rfc5162bis-09-secdir-lc-hallam-baker-2014-02-19-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-qresync-rfc5162bis
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2014-02-18
Requested 2014-01-16
Authors Alexey Melnikov, Dave Cridland
Draft last updated 2014-02-19
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -09 by David Black (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -10 by David Black
Secdir Last Call review of -09 by Phillip Hallam-Baker (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Phillip Hallam-Baker
State Completed
Review review-ietf-qresync-rfc5162bis-09-secdir-lc-hallam-baker-2014-02-19
Reviewed rev. 09 (document currently at 10)
Review result Has Issues
Review completed: 2014-02-19

Review
review-ietf-qresync-rfc5162bis-09-secdir-lc-hallam-baker-2014-02-19

  I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's




ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the

IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the




security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat




these comments just like any other last call comments.




We have a problem here, the security considerations in the draft are 

a back reference to the original protocol. This is the security references




section of IMAP, a core Internet protocol in their entirety:




11

.     Security Considerations






   IMAP4rev1 protocol transactions, including electronic mail data, are
   sent in the clear over the network unless protection from snooping is
   negotiated.  This can be accomplished either by the use of STARTTLS,
   negotiated privacy protection in the AUTHENTICATE command, or some
   other protection mechanism.

-- 

Website: 

http://hallambaker.com/