[20175] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: NPR : E-Mail Encryption Rare in Everyday Use
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ed Gerck)
Wed Mar 1 09:09:26 2006
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 17:32:05 -0800
From: Ed Gerck <edgerck@nma.com>
To: John W Noerenberg II <jwn2@qualcomm.com>
Cc: Ben Laurie <ben@algroup.co.uk>,
Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: <p07000c05c02a9eb37c83@[129.46.76.39]>
John W Noerenberg II wrote:
> At 5:58 PM -0800 2/24/06, Ed Gerck wrote:
>> A phone number is not an "envelope" -- it's routing information, just
>> like
>> an email address. Publishing the email address is not in question and
>> there are alternative ways to find it out, such as search engines.
>
> Oh really? Then you should be able to send a note to my gmail address.
I did quite not get the irony/humor. All I'm saying about an email
address is that (1) it does not work as an envelope (hiding contents); and
(2) there's no big problem in using it. You publish your email address
every time you send an email from it, which may also make it searchable.
> At 1:11 PM -0800 2/25/06, Ed Gerck wrote:
>> Arguments that people give each other their cell phone numbers, for
>> example,
>> and even though there isn't a cell phone directory people use cell phones
>> well, also forget the user's point of view when comparing a phone
>> number with
>> a public-key.
>
> And that distinction is?
>
> To me a cell-phone number is a string of characters, and a public-key is
> - a string of characters.
The distinction should be obvious if you try to tell someone your public-key
over the phone, byte by byte for 1024 bits, versus telling her your
8-digit cell phone number.
Cheers,
Ed Gerck
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
