1996-02-18 - Re: Using lasers to communicate

Header Data

From: SINCLAIR DOUGLAS N <sinclai@ecf.toronto.edu>
To: dsmith@midwest.net (David E. Smith)
Message Hash: 73241e3ef25ce0c6a749438a1ba8fea3aa90feddc18264f6665ba65668b033a7
Message ID: <96Feb17.224435edt.950@cannon.ecf.toronto.edu>
Reply To: <2.2.32.19960217230344.006adfa0@204.248.40.2>
UTC Datetime: 1996-02-18 04:04:47 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 18 Feb 1996 12:04:47 +0800

Raw message

From: SINCLAIR  DOUGLAS N <sinclai@ecf.toronto.edu>
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 1996 12:04:47 +0800
To: dsmith@midwest.net (David E. Smith)
Subject: Re: Using lasers to communicate
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960217230344.006adfa0@204.248.40.2>
Message-ID: <96Feb17.224435edt.950@cannon.ecf.toronto.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> If you have a secure link you don't need encryption.  Arguably, the
> converse is true; if you have secure encryption you don't need
> a secure link.  Isn't the ability to transmit secure data over
> insecure channels one of the primary justifications for encryption?
> 

Of course.  My point, though I seem to have failed to state it,
is that encryption is a cheap software thing while laser beams
are expensive, complicated, and still not secure.






Thread