NPR : E-Mail Encryption Rare in Everyday Use

[Greg Black]

On 2006-02-24, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

> Personally I doubt that anything other than a small percentage of email
> will ever be signed, let alone encrypted (heck, most people on this list
> don't even sign their mail).

That's at least partly because too many mailing lists either
reject signed messages out of hand or, worse, have subscribers
who use providers that reject signed messages and then spam you
with their idiotic bounce messages.  Keeping track of which
lists allow signed email and which don't is impractical if you
subscribe to hundreds of lists, so the simple thing is to tick
the "don't sign" box on list messages.

In this case, since Peter's message was signed, I know this list
allows signatures.  So I'll sign this message.

But the signature will be of limited utility, as not one of the
several email addresses on my signature is a match for the email
address I am sending this from.  Again, lists being what they
are, I use a different address for most lists and my PGP key
would become absurd if I added several hundred addresses to it.

I personally would prefer to sign every email I send.  I'd also
prefer to encrypt all non-public messages.  I am fully competent
in the use of the current technology, but it turns out to be not
practical to use.

Greg
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20060225/f183109b/attachment.pgp>