* Stephen Farrell wrote:
On 01/04/2014 12:45 AM, l(_dot_)wood(_at_)surrey(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk wrote:
"Please include a full explanation of how pervasive monitoring is
mitigated in this protocol. If this protocol is not fully
cryptographically secure to defeat pervasive monitoring, explain why
not."
What are you quoting? That text is *not* part of the
draft, nor do I recall it being sent to the list by
anyone.
Surely inventing quotes is not fair game here?
The quote marks indicate that the text is a paraphrase; Lloyd Wood re-
states the meaning, or a possible interpretation, of the text, likely
to illustrate a problem with the text. This is a common discourse tech-
nique and should be entirely obvious; nothing unfair about it.
If it does not reflect the intended meaning of the text, then there are
various ways to make that very explicit in the text, for instance, it
could literally say that "full explanation of how pervasive monitoring
is mitigated" is not expected or required. Then it should be obvious
that the above is not a permissable paraphrase.
--
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern(_at_)hoehrmann(_dot_)de ·
http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/