[aklug] Re: Interesting story about privacy

The question is not who could gain access, but whether you have a
reasonable expectation they won't. I have reasonable expectation that
no one will real my snail mail, and the courts subscribe to that
notion because there is an envelope. Of course, there is no right to
privacy in the us constitution. The question re email should be, as
with snail mail, whether there is an analog of the envelope.

If I want to use email certs most easily implemented under tbird I
need a trusted authority and I need societal commitment to use same
standard.... That is almost as impossible as mandating system wide
tls...

On Nov 1, 2009, at 10:29 PM, Jim Gribbin <jimgribbin@gmail.com> wrote:

> I tend to think the real root of the problem here is that as
> everyone on
> this list already knows, email is about as private as a postcard.
>
> When you say it in an email, you might as well be saying it standing
> on
> a soapbox at the corner of 4th and Main. When you say something in a
> public place, there is no expectation of privacy to begin with. When
> there is no expectation of privacy, the 4th Amendment has no
> application.
>
> Yes Mike, I think we should be encrypting. We should have been doing
> so
> long ago. One state, Nevada, has already started requiring the use of
> encryption when electronically sending confidential client
> information.
> Should we be any less careless with our own information?
>
> Sorry to climb on my high horse about this, but it's something that
> has
> been irking me for a while.
>
> Yes, I have tried setting up encryption, but it does no good in a
> vacuum. If I remember correctly, Damien and I could exchange private
> emails. Whoopee!!
>
> Jim G
>
> On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 20:31 -0800, Shane Spencer wrote:
>> Baka. I refuse to think that anything I've ever written in an email
>> was not written by myself - and was actually written by a monkey,
>> or a
>> robot, or anything else without human rights since I apparently can
>> prove otherwise. Regardless of if I can prove one way or another my
>> communication was my own - it still came from me and was more
>> explicitly addressed in most cases than if I were standing soap box
>> shouting about social reform to random passerbys.
>>
>> Valid communication shouldn't be required to have a TTL=1.
>>
>> - Robot Shane
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 4:10 PM, barsalou <barjunk@attglobal.net>
>> wrote:
>>> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/09/10/29/2257209/Federal-Judge-Says-E-mail-Not-Protected-By-4th-Amendment
>>>
>>> I guess this means if we really want our communications between each
>>> other via e-mail, or any other vehicle for that matter, we better
>>> start encrypting it.
>>>
>>> Yikes!
>>>
>>> Mike B.
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>>>
>>> ---------
>>> To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
>>> with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
>>>
>>>
>> ---------
>> To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
>> with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
>>
>
> ---------
> To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
> with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
>
---------
To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
Received on Mon Nov 2 06:33:23 2009