Hi. On Wednesday 14 May 2008, Aidas Kasparas wrote: > I do not have arguments why courier should not fallback in 454 cases > [remember "be liberal at what you accept" internet principle?].
Well, let's go the other way: We talk about TLS encryption. This is an encryption, something about security and privacy. When I send mail, I want to have every connection encrypted that is not inside a local network. All internet-transfers of personal/confident data should be encrypted. It's too bad already that some hosts don't offer TLS at all, but the hosts of my regular peers all do and I know that. So I can send mail encrypted even if my PGP-setup cannot be used (because the other side does not have PGP or something like that). If courier would silently fall back to non-encrypted transfer whenever a temporary failure occures (overload, error in check of certificate/man-in-the-middle-attack), this would be a terrible loss of trust in this encryption and it would not be worth anything any more. Let me say again: We are talking about privacy. It should be deterministic if messages are transferred encrypted or not. regards, Bernd -- Press <ESC> to detonate or any other key to explode
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
