From: Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>
To: Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>
Message Hash: 8e8f013475a6aae9abc2dd67fe4892408a183ab51a2a986dcbe2a3bd9e06d336
Message ID: <Pine.GUL.3.93.960507231202.14261E-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
Reply To: <199605072229.PAA28013@netcom8.netcom.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-05-08 10:43:30 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 18:43:30 +0800
From: Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>
Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 18:43:30 +0800
To: Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Transitive trust and MLM
In-Reply-To: <199605072229.PAA28013@netcom8.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GUL.3.93.960507231202.14261E-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
On Tue, 7 May 1996, Bill Frantz wrote:
> Some of the solution to this problem may come from the answer to the
> question, "What am I trusting the receiver with?" I can see a number of
> possibilities:
>
> (1) I just want an envelope so casual eavesdroppers can't read the mail.
> Given the people Rich Graves has been dealing with, I see this as a
> powerful reason to encrypt all private email, just as you might send all
> private postal mail in envelopes rather than on postcards.
Oh, those WhoWhere? guys are just a bunch of pussycats.
The fact that you're sending postcards is only a problem if you don't want
them to be read. It's more the email I receive that I worry about, so all
my friends use the address rich@alpha.c2.org now.
You should only worry about men in the middle when you're playing
volleyball. The endpoints are usually far more vulnerable.
-rich
http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~llurch/
Return to May 1996
Return to “Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>”