On 08/04/12 22:36, Chris Bannister wrote: > On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 01:55:06PM +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote: >> On 08/04/12 12:26, Chris Bannister wrote: >>> I suppose you mean encrypting, you can still read signed mail. The point >>> to note is that *if suddenly* two people start encrypting their mail, >>> that alone will set off alarm bells >> >> Yes - though it presupposes "someone" is monitoring that email. Which > > Obviously. It *could* be done automatically. Who knows why, but that is > not worth speculating on really. Computer savvy jealous boy/girl friend, > etc.
You're trying too hard. That path leads to paranoia. That using encryption might make people suspicious is no reason not to use encryption. Quite the reverse. If people you don't wish to share your information with want to know your business - use encryption. You propose that because communications "might" be under surveillance [*1] you should *not* secure communications with encryption. Huh? I refuse to sing "Is this glove that I'm feeling" in the hope that shifty eyed people don't look at me - but you pick your own music ;-p [*1]as if the information is volatile and surveillance can't be retrospective To further propose that encryption shouldn't be used because it employs finite resources boggles the mind. Surveillance is bad, privacy is good, but don't use up the resources of privacy invaders because it's use up precious resources. Oh right, because then they'll look at the people you're sending it too, and read the headers, and work out what was in the encrypted emails (and what you had for dinner). Surely "they" would just fly a nano drone through the wall vent and film your communications - or break into your house and bug it, or use Echelon, or, or. If you don't want every bored teenager who works for an email provider, or cracker hired by your business competitors, reading your email. Use encryption. Of course email magically bounces from the sender to the recipient without routing through dozens of machines so... oh wait. So people 'may' wonder what you're communicating about - *that's why you use encryption*. Maybe it's prompt them to look closer at what they can see. Same logic applies to drawing the curtains and shredding paperwork before binning it. The same logic applies to people who sensibly encrypt their computers. Fully encrypting a portable device is a sign of responsibility not suspicious activity. Worrying too much about what "people" might thing is possible a sign of something else. :-) NOTE: deniable encryption and stenography is a sign of suspicious activity - though maybe nothing more serious than furry fans, and of course, if "they" can prove deniable encryption - you're not doing it right. > >> would make a compelling reason *to* encrypt email. > > I said "... that *if suddenly* two people start encrypting ... " Which I read and quoted. <snipped> > Some people say that if you get a laptop with a finger identification > setup on it you are safer, I say, the opposite, I want to keep all my > fingers. Too much Hollywood (or lead paint, the symptoms are similar). In the real world Sillyputty, bluetack, or certain chewy lollies are used to lift a print good enough to bypass both Dell and Lockwood fingerprint locks. Much simpler again to dust that dirty swipe with toner and cover with double red gels first though - can save a lot of time trying to find a good fingerprint (or just pulling out the hard drive). Fingerprint locks are not as good as decent passphrases. They're just there to make it hard for junkies to access your data when they steal your device - for people too lazy to learn how to produce a decent passphrase that doesn't need writing down. Unless coupled with encryption (which most of the laptop with them are) it's useless (remove hard drive, read). And lastly on that subject - are you the guy who *hasn't* seen the XKCD $5 spanner joke? :-) <snipped> Kind regards -- Iceweasel/Firefox/Chrome/Chromium/Iceape/IE extensions for finding answers to questions about Debian:- https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/collections/Scott_Ferguson/debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f8196a3.90...@gmail.com