..on Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:16:31AM +0000, Nick wrote: > Quoth Julian Oliver: > > Indeed, but there's a wide gulf between asserting that people > > should not use (or > > start to use) PGP at all until a better solution is available - as he does > > - and > > developing (and testing) alternatives in parallel. After all, any > > alternative > > might prove to be more or equally as vulnerable as PGP. > > > > For the time being PGP continues to work pretty well here for my > > non-life-and-death communication needs. I'd rather use PGP than send mail > > in the > > clear. I'm sure this sentiment is shared by many others. > > At the risk of flogging a dead horse, I think this is missing the > point of the OP slightly. He isn't saying "don't use PGP now" so > much as "PGP / SMTP / IMAP is never going to be the solution we > really need" - for everyone, not just the particularly vulnerable > (who are still at risk in several key ways, such as failing open and > metadata analysis) or technically savvy. > > I use PGP, and I am very very glad to have it, but (against my > expectations) Carlo has completely won me over to the position that > it's better for everyone if we start again with email, rather than > try (and largely fail) to convince ordinary people to change their > mail habits, providers to change their setups, etc. > > I would still advocate for PGP + existing email standards at the > present, where it's needed, but don't see it as a way to > provide good safety for everyone.
Fair enough. I understand the reasoning. Cheers, Julian -- Julian Oliver PGP 36EED09D http://julianoliver.com http://criticalengineering.org -- Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
