'Re: ssl auth failure gui: does "continue" do what I think it does?'

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List: kde-devel
Subject: Re: ssl auth failure gui: does "continue" do what I think it does?
From: Allan Sandfeld Jensen <kde () carewolf ! com>
Date: 2009-06-09 21:37:12
Message-ID: 200906092337.12396.kde () carewolf ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]

On Tuesday 09 June 2009, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>
> So... let me clarify. You don't have* /end-to-end/ encryption. There is
> no way to know that the MitM isn't passing your bits along in the clear.
> You only know you have encryption in the strict technical (and useless,
> as far as security) sense.
>
What on earth makes it useless? It is only unsafe in a mathematical 0 or 1 
sense, by not being 100% secure, but in reality you have protected you against 
99.999% of possible attackers, leaving only your peer, and ISPs and anyone 
compromising any of those entities.

`Allan

[Attachment #5 (text/html)]

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0//EN" \
"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/strict.dtd"><html><head><meta name="qrichtext" content="1" /><style \
type="text/css">p, li { white-space: pre-wrap; }</style></head><body style=" font-family:'Monospace'; \
font-size:10pt; font-weight:400; font-style:normal;">On Tuesday 09 June 2009, Matthew Woehlke wrote: \
&gt; &gt; So... let me clarify. You don't have* /end-to-end/ encryption. There is 
&gt; no way to know that the MitM isn't passing your bits along in the clear. 
&gt; You only know you have encryption in the strict technical (and useless, 
&gt; as far as security) sense. 
&gt; 
What on earth makes it useless? It is only unsafe in a mathematical 0 or 1 sense, by not being 100% \
secure, but in reality you have protected you against 99.999% of possible attackers, leaving only your \
peer, and ISPs and anyone compromising any of those entities. `Allan</body></html>

>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 