On 2011-04-02 Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 02.04.2011 23:17, schrieb Jeroen Geilman: >> I see Mr Reindl is butting his big mouth in again > > is your toilet broken or why is your neck so big?
You've repeatedly shown an attitude on this list that I consider objectionable, to say the least. Would you mind keeping it to yourself? Thank you. >> I "should" do nothing. > > YOU can do waht you want, but do not recommend others wrong things He didn't. [...] >> Because the primary value of TLS on a mail client is to be able to >> send encrypted login information, and prevent sniffing on local LAN >> networks > > *lol* > > you know about cram-md5 / digest-md5 > this is for login-information You do realize that these have other disadvantages, don't you? Like the requirement to store the user's unencrypted password on the server. [...] >> I can only repeat that your preposterous "SHOULD" demands are silly. >> Guaranteed end-to-end encryption is not a job for the MTA. >> Use PGP or GPG to achieve message confidentiality. > > you were the who spoke about "the majority"? > the majority is not using GPG! Which doesn't change anything about the fact that PGP/GPG is suited for ensuring end-to-end confidentiality, while TLS is not. TLS only ever guarantees encrypted transmission to the next HOP. Period. Live with it. Regards Ansgar Wiechers -- "Abstractions save us time working, but they don't save us time learning." --Joel Spolsky
