Re: Why the poor uptake of encrypted email? [Was: Re: Secrets and cell phones.]
-- We discovered, however, that most people do not want to manage their own secrets StealthMonger wrote: This may help to explain the poor uptake of encrypted email. There is very good uptake of skype and ssh, because those impose no or very little additional cost on the end user. Secret management is almost furtively sneaked in on the back of other tasks. It would be useful to know exactly what has been discovered. Can you provide references? It is informal knowledge. A field has references when it is a science, or attempting to become a science, or pretending to become a science. Security is not yet even an art. Cryptography is an art that dubiously pretends to science, but the weak point of course is interaction of humans with the cryptography, in which area we have not even the pretense of art. - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to majord...@metzdowd.com
Re: Why the poor uptake of encrypted email? [Was: Re: Secrets and cell phones.]
On 8 Dec 2008, at 22:43, David G. Koontz wrote: JOHN GALT wrote: StealthMonger wrote: This may help to explain the poor uptake of encrypted email. It would be useful to know exactly what has been discovered. Can you provide references? The iconic Paper explaining this is Why Johnny Can't Encrypt available here: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1251435 Available from the Authors: http://gaudior.net/alma/johnny.pdf A later follow up (s/mime; more focus on the KDC): http://www.simson.net/clips/academic/2005.SOUPS.johnny2.pdf is IMHO more interesting - as it explores a more realistic hostile scenario, seems to pinpoint the core security issue better; and goes to some length to evaluate remedial steps. And it does show that a large swath of issues in PGP are indeed solvable/solved (now) Thanks, Dw - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why the poor uptake of encrypted email? [Was: Re: Secrets and cell phones.]
StealthMonger wrote: This may help to explain the poor uptake of encrypted email. It would be useful to know exactly what has been discovered. Can you provide references? The iconic Paper explaining this is Why Johnny Can't Encrypt available here: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1251435 JOHN ;) Timestamp: Monday 08 Dec 2008, 16:13 --500 (Eastern Standard Time) - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why the poor uptake of encrypted email? [Was: Re: Secrets and cell phones.]
JOHN GALT wrote: StealthMonger wrote: This may help to explain the poor uptake of encrypted email. It would be useful to know exactly what has been discovered. Can you provide references? The iconic Paper explaining this is Why Johnny Can't Encrypt available here: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1251435 Available from the Authors: http://gaudior.net/alma/johnny.pdf http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~tygar/papers/Why_Johnny_Cant_Encrypt/OReilly.pdf (For those of us not ACM members and not having Library or affliate access). There's also a power point presentation on the cognitive dissonance involved: http://www.nku.edu/~waldenj1/classes/2006/spring/csc593/presentations/Johnny.ppt And something done at Carnegie Mellon: http://cups.cs.cmu.edu/courses/ups-sp06/notes/060202LectureNotes.doc http://cups.cs.cmu.edu/courses/ups-sp06/slides/060202-user-tests2.ppt - The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
