> All the messages in this thread make one thing clear: (1) the
> programmers are mostly against it. (2) The user are mostly for it.
1) is because when it becomes apparent that it's a terribly-insecure hacky
feature, it's the programmers who take the flak.
You can't conclude 2), because users who think it's a silly idea won't
bother saying so as they can see it's never going to happen :-)
> It is therefore very clear that the programmers NEED client (users)
> oriented project managers that will TELL them what to program.
Are you volunteering to tell us all what to do? :-)
> Unfortunately, this discussion has made it very clear that programmers
> are unable to see the bigger picture. Or how else can one explain why
> there is a PSM password at all (if the holy OS is to deal with security
> issues)?
There is a difference between the sort of security which keeps users from
snooping on one anothers' files (which has to be implemented at OS level,
or it won't work) and internal application security.
> Why should anyone with access to my running PC (e.g. at work) be able to
> read my local folders mails?
They shouldn't. So, we should introduce some proper crypto, not this
pathetic "simple password" stuff which can be got around by anyone with a
text editor.
Gerv
