On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 18:58:50 +0000
oshwm <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > ... Which leads me into my second point, which is that here in 2015
> > PGP is a terrible technical solution. It doesn't encrypt metadata
> > (which is a non-starter these days - who you communicate with is
> > some of the *most* valuable personal data for the NSA). It also
> > leaks information about who signed your key. That means either:
> >
>
> Oh yeh, some bright spark came up with STARTTLS for encrypting comms
> with mail servers but made it optional, not a GPG issue.
> However, the metadata issue a big problem for everyone who connects
> to a server that isn't owned by them and I suspect really requires a
> new mail protocol to resolve.
Looks like Joseph isn't putting too much thought in his
replies.
There's obviously no way for email encryption to hide the so
called metadata. You'd need some kind of mix network to do
that. Complaining that pgpg doesn't encrypt the metadata is
misguided.
Also, his remark about this *public* list not being encrypted
is...puzzling...at best.
