PGP Universal - Usable Email Security?

An anonymous reader writes "For years, noted cypherpunks such as Brad Templeton, Ian Goldberg (PDF link), Bram Cohen, and Len Sassaman (PDF link) have been calling for easy to use email encryption solutions which involve little crypto comprehension on the part of the user. Now, it seems like someone has listened: PGP Corporation has announced its PGP Universal, which says it 'shifts the burden of securing email messages and attachments from the desktop to the network in a way that is automatic and entirely transparent to users'." The Register has more information on these newly announced proxy servers.

Comments

Re:Thus defeating the object?

[soulsteal]

It's more like they're offering Company Provided Aluminium Foil Hats(C) in case you're tired of wearing your regular Aluminium Foil Deflector Beanie.

Re:Thus defeating the object?

[Trigun]

Imagine trying to support people that still can't find the "any" key..

Just support them over a cliff for as long as your arm can hold out.

Re:Thus defeating the object?

[fish waffle]

i work with a guy who went to work for the nsa (that's right, super-spook central)...

If they are allowed to say they work for the NSA, then surely they do not really work for the NSA.

I dunno about "Pretty Good" anything...

[TexVex]

If you buy Pretty Good Privacy, does that mean you'd shop with a real estate agent who sells pretty good houses? Would you buy a pretty good car from Pretty Good Motors?

Pretty Good ain't good enough for me. I'll take Fuggin' Awesome Privacy, thank you very much.

Re:I dunno about "Pretty Good" anything...

[bons]

Why not? I'm running a Pretty Good operating system and reading a Prety Good forum with a couple of Pretty Good messages.

You can only have high technology standards in a world that's stopped evolving.

Re:Thus defeating the object?

[RabidOverYou]

Ah, that's what they want you to think. It's those who say they work for the NSA, such that you think they must not work for the NSA, that really do work for the NSA. It's those who don't that don't. Or do. Don't. Wait.

Re:Thus defeating the object?

[fred911]

"You can still add on your own encryption outside of this system if you are extra paranoid.

Correct.

I'm double encrytping this message now. Double Rot13.

Question

[4of12]

Can I please make some money, too, by using SSL for some previously plain text protocol and serving as a certifying authority between any two parties?

Re:Shouldn't keyfob USB help here instead?

[angst_ridden_hipster]

Then, the EvilAgentsOfTheCompetition merely need to steal you keyfob.

"Ah," you say! "But the biometric passphrase will protect me!"

Yeah, until they "borrow" your finger.

(Long pointless tangential ramble: When I worked in a facility with a palm scanner, we always wanted to have it be our left hand. We figured the Russians might want to borrow our hand if they really wanted to get in to the place. Then there was the retina scanner. It's very difficult borrow someone's eye without causing enough damage to make it no longer match ... but, if they're good, they just take the rest of the head with it. And even if they're not good, and cause enough damage to prevent access, well, crap, they still have your head.)

Re:Too bad Yahoo, Hotmail, etc. don't do this for

[Anonymous Coward]

Yahoo Mail does a superb job of catching spam and scanning for viruses.

Er... ok... has someone started a new yahoo or something... is this the same one I use...?

I can't wait for:

[Ex Machina]

new outlook viruses to be safely encrytped all the way to my local mailserver!

Re:If you want truly usable encrypted email....

[nacturation]

You should try KDE's KMail with gpg integration.
It is milk-simple and as easy to use as a nipple.

So given the experience that the male population on Slashdot has had with the gender owning said nipples, does that mean you're saying it's very difficult?