🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4q94pt$70c@dilbert.multiverse.com>,
Jamie <jamie@multiverse.com> wrote:
>fn979@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Don Reynolds) wrote:
>>
>>In a recent newscast 60 Minutes reported that e-mail
>>was  not  private.
>
>That's what PGP is for.

	And unfortunately, it's becoming an increasingly necessary
	tool for ensuring e-mail privacy.

>>Heck, we on  the net know that, but they did bring  out
>>one point and that was, any  system operator can make back
>>up  files and  therefore your e-mail  may be in a system
>>somewhere for  years.
>
>Any good network admin will encrypt the mail spool, even if it's a
>simple key, so that future references to the tape will bounce the
>occasional teenage hacker-wannabe.

	You may *think* that any good network admins encrypt mail
	spools, but in practice many (if not most I daresay) don't.
	(or they use a very small key like you said)

>>Your e-mail may go thru many systems, and your  chances
>>of having privacy in e-mail is nill.
>
>Not on the Internet.  If two Internet-connected sites, A and B,
>have users transferring mail between the two, then no other machine
>sees e-mail besides the mail machine at system A's site, and the
>mail machine on system B's site.

	Although the physical data must traverse a network path,
	which makes it possible for me to snoop your connection
        and grab the mail that way. The mail itself may not be
	spooled and then resent by ten billion hosts, but the 
	TCP/IP session in which site A transfers the data to Site B
	is transmitted through several different systems.

	You're right, though - PGP will do the trick nicely.

	
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Patrick Lewis  patrick@hamnet.org, patrick@turkey.hamnet.org