Liste des Groupes | Revenir à s crypt |
On 09/02/2025 14:48, Richard Heathfield wrote:No, but such people presumably aren't interested in secure communication and don't give a damn about keeping their secrets secret, so how are they relevant to this discussion?On 09/02/2025 12:21, Peter Fairbrother wrote:On 08/02/2025 23:25, Richard Heathfield wrote:But most people don't know how to open a terminal - even clever people. Just because they don't know computers, computer security, internet security, cryptography - does not make them stupid.>You might use it as a channel for sheer convenience, but it would be daft not to superencrypt.>
But people don't know how to do that. Even many clever people.
It's easy. Instead of:
>
apple < plain.txt
>
you:
>
cat plain.txt | aes_for_example > apple
>
and Bob pipes through aes_for_example -d at his end.
>
In other words, instead of sending plaintext through Apple, you send ciphertext.
And even stupid people should have secure comms and data storage.Why would they care, if security is so unimportant to them that they can't be bothered to learn how to acquire it?
:-)Been there, done that, the tee-shirt is now rags.>>Note that in the UK you have to give up keys to stored data on demand.>
With a warrant, yes, and that means evidence, which means the crook has already failed.
Nope, no warrant needed. Just a demand from a mid-level policeman.
Having read the relevant legislation, which is not the kind of document I'd like to read for the first time in a panic, I'm not convinced either way. This is a job for an actual lawyer.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.