On Thu, Sep 16, 2004 at 06:12:48PM +0100, Ian Grigg wrote:
| Adam Shostack wrote:
| Given our failure to deploy PKC in any meaningful way*, I think that
| systems like Voltage, and the new PGP Universal are great.
|
| I think the consensus from debate back last year on
| this group when Voltage
At 10:19 PM 9/15/2004, Ed Gerck wrote:
Yes, PKC provides a workable solution for key distribution... when you
look at servers. For email, the PKC solution is not workable (hasn't been)
and gives a false impression of security. For example, the sender has no
way of knowing if the recipient's key is
Adam Shostack wrote:
On Thu, Sep 16, 2004 at 12:05:57PM -0700, Ed Gerck wrote:
| Adam Shostack wrote:
|
| I think the consensus from debate back last year on
| this group when Voltage first surfaced was that it
| didn't do anything that couldn't be done with PGP,
| and added more risks to boot.
|
http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/9682511.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp
The San Jose Mercury News
Posted on Thu, Sep. 16, 2004
Symantec to acquire digital security company
CUPERTINO, Calif. (AP) - Symantec Corp. said Thursday it is acquiring
digital security
At 05:35 PM 9/16/2004, Adam Shostack wrote:
Generate a key for [EMAIL PROTECTED] encrypt mail to
Bob to that key. When Bob shows up, decrypt and send over ssl.
note there is still the issue of knowing it is bob ... whether before the
transmission or after the transmission and, in fact, the
On Thu, Sep 16, 2004 at 04:57:39PM -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:
At 10:19 PM 9/15/2004, Ed Gerck wrote:
Yes, PKC provides a workable solution for key distribution... when you
look at servers. For email, the PKC solution is not workable (hasn't been)
and gives a false impression of security. For
lrk wrote:
Perhaps it is time to define an e-mail definition of crypto to keep the
postman from reading the postcards. That should be easy enough to
implement for the average user and provide some degree of privacy for
their mail. Call it envelopes rather than crypto. Real security
requires more
--- begin forwarded text
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 17:48:25 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Paul Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Openswan dev] [Announce] Openswan 2.2.0 released
List-Id: Openswan developer mailinglist dev.openswan.org
List-Archive:
Bill Stewart wrote:
At 10:19 PM 9/15/2004, Ed Gerck wrote:
Yes, PKC provides a workable solution for key distribution... when you
look at servers. For email, the PKC solution is not workable (hasn't
been)
and gives a false impression of security. For example, the sender has no
way of knowing if
