On Wednesday 21 November 2007 00:21, Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Tuesday 20 November 2007 23:48, Michael Rogers wrote: > > Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > Because it works immediately? > > > > Replying to an email is hardly arduous. The increase in convenience > > isn't worth the decrease in security in my opinion, but let's agree to > > disagree. > > > > > Doesn't matter. They'd have to feed it in before the person hearing does; > > > voice recognition isn't that good, even if you can have it automatically > > > figure out that it's a password. > > > > If there's a person listening, they can initiate a connection just as > > quickly as the intended listener. But if targetted surveillance is > > outside your attack model, fair enough. Like I said, too many spy films. :-) > > :)
Well we should support those who want to be secure against this kind of threat. But we don't need to make it ridiculously easy for them: they can exchange full noderefs. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20071121/5db7576b/attachment.pgp>
