[745] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Full Strength Stronghold 2.0 Released Worldwide
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tom Weinstein)
Wed May 7 21:32:58 1997
Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 18:13:19 -0700
From: Tom Weinstein <tomw@netscape.com>
To: Steve <steve@edmweb.com>
CC: sameer <sameer@c2.net>, Matt Blaze <mab@crypto.com>, adam@homeport.org,
cryptography@c2.net
Steve wrote:
>
> >>> A better design, I think, would upon receipt re-encrypt each
> >>> message, if local
> >
> > And how, exactly, do you plan to handle IMAP server folders?
>
> Security vs. convenience. Either you trust the IMAP server with your
> mail and allow it to search etc, or you don't trust the server and
> have to download the mail for decryption.
This is clearly true.
> This could probably be done on a per-message basis. Some messages can
> be trusted to the server, some can't. Sender would have to decide.
I don't think the sender should be deciding what mail folder I can
stick a message in.
Restricting the functionality of mail in non-obvious ways is really
bad for usability. Exactly how would you explain this behavior to a
user? I bet that a lot of users would just throw up their hands and
decide not to use encrypted mail. That would be a bad result.
--
You should only break rules of style if you can | Tom Weinstein
coherently explain what you gain by so doing. | tomw@netscape.com
