NODE 95d95fd6Re: SMTP Encryption Extension
Ariel Glenn <ariel@watsun.cc.columbia.edu>Tue, 21 Oct 1997 07:16:57 +0800
>Well, what are we really concerned about? Not Web traffic - although your
>web surfing history is private information, the data itself is by nature
>public and encrypting it is kinda pointless.
Not at all! Most of my time is spent trying to keep 'restricted data'
from being scooped by the wrong people... from the Web. We have
licensed data, students' private data, surveys and voting (the results
of which should be available only in certain formats and then only to
certain people), etc. etc... So data kept on the filesystem has to
be protected and it has to be encrypted when it is sent out to the
browsing (legitimate) user.
Nice try...
Ariel Glenn
ariel@columbia.edu
NODE cd400ac2Re: SMTP Encryption Extension
mskala@meares.csc.UVic.CATue, 21 Oct 1997 15:55:37 +0800
On Mon, 20 Oct 1997, Ariel Glenn wrote:
> >Well, what are we really concerned about? Not Web traffic - although your
>
> Not at all! Most of my time is spent trying to keep 'restricted data'
> from being scooped by the wrong people... from the Web. We have
Well, whatever. *I'm* more concerned about email. Of course the same
argument could be used to support encrypted HTTP, but there's already
plenty of work being done on that and the main problems seem to be
political rather than technical.