On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 1:20 PM, holger krekel <hol...@merlinux.eu> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 10:47 -0500, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > > The authorities don't usually care about the content of communications. > If > > Alice is a dissident and they know she has talked to Bob then its twenty > > years in the gulag for Bob regardless of what the messages say. > > If it's all about metadata why do so many "authorities" criminalize > or try hard to prevent end-to-end encryption? > That gives them a pretext for an arrest. In the case of Comey, he can't arrest his political opponents but he can damage their activities. > > [...] > > But availability is still king and integrity is still queen. What those > > people are risking their lives to do is to get the information out. That > > is an availability concern. > > I consider getting information out to public circles orthogonal > to enabling encrypted group or 1:1 communications. > Getting information out, circulating it is what makes change happen. Encryption is useful but Availability is King and Integrity is Queen. > > [...] > > RFC7435 is talking about preventing mass surveillance. And that is a > > confidentiality problem. OpenPGP is not designed to prevent mass > > surveillance, and there are few tools less suited to that task than > > OpenPGP and S/MIME. Other than sending an email to the NSA saying 'look > at > > me', I can't think of anything more likely to label you as a risk than > > sending encrypted messages in an unencrypted transport. > > Being the odd one who encrypts makes you stick out, sure. Which is why > i think mail encryption needs to become more widespread. Yes and that is a fine goal. But security is a property of systems and I am not going to want your end to end encrypted messages carrying potentially harmful attachments unless I know who they are from.
_______________________________________________ Messaging mailing list Messaging@moderncrypto.org https://moderncrypto.org/mailman/listinfo/messaging
