Re: getross - email privacy /security of system
Bert Driehuis <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.pine.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, Ryan Barrett wrote: > wow, is that true? i'd meant that they'd need to include encryption, PGP > style, in their base installs. outlook and thunderbird already do that?!? or > do you just mean there are plugins available? At least a few of these products have some flavor of S/MIME or some such on board. All based on some flavor of hierarchical X.509 certificates; not PGP-style peer certificates. Trying to get it to work is about as much fun a getting a root canal treatment. For example, getting one combination of Outlook/Exchange to talk to another version of Outlook/Exchange can be a challenge; I've seen instances where the receiving Exchange stripped the cryptographic signature; I've seen other instances of the message being eaten altogether. The user was completely in the dark in both cases, and tracing the logs I could see it happening but I'm in the dark as to what caused it to this day. Finding a certificate authority with clean hands is another challenge. Would you trust one who takes $35 out of your credit card, then claims the transaction fails, holds you ransom until you pay another $35, and subsequently runs you in circles when you try to get your money back? PGP is great. Unfortunately, IMHO the old PGP was greater than the subsequent PGP and when I had to maintain multiple copies of PGP with radically different command lines just to decrypt older stuff I sort of gave up. The teething pains of GPG are less pronounced but I still haven't come round to switching (which is a good thing, because my usage was in fact affected by the barn-door sized bug that was fixed recently, if I understood the announcement correctly). Crypto is not for the faint of heart. And end-users, by and large, have more trust in the authorities than they have in technology, and much as I distrust some authorities, the above examples do point out that the technosceptical users do have an point that's rooted in fact. Cheers, -- Bert _______________________________________________ Pine-info mailing list [email protected] http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/pine-info