On Tuesday 21 August 2007 12:04:35 Dafydd Harries wrote: > I think that's rubbish. Whenever the average user has a choice between > "make it work" and "don't make it work", they will pick "make it work" > every time.
Why is that rubbish? I think it would be unwise to hide the security status away from the client - if only so the client can put a little message/icon/whatever in the IM window and warn the user that any information [s]he sends is potentially open to sniffing. I feel the user has a right to know whether the CM they're using can support encrypted traffic or not. > Also, what are your criteria for "secure"? Supports SSL encryption (or some other encryption method) of all IM traffic. -- George Wright, http://www.gwright.org.uk Collabora Ltd - http://www.collabora.co.uk
pgpu11bEXm7yf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Telepathy mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/telepathy
