<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Self decrypting emails considered harmful</title>
	<atom:link href="http://moreati.org.uk/blog/2009/02/09/self-decrypting-emails-considered-harmful/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://moreati.org.uk/blog/2009/02/09/self-decrypting-emails-considered-harmful/</link>
	<description>A blog about life, technology &#38; databases</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Jun 2010 01:50:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: geoff daum</title>
		<link>http://moreati.org.uk/blog/2009/02/09/self-decrypting-emails-considered-harmful/comment-page-1/#comment-146</link>
		<dc:creator>geoff daum</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 15:01:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.moreati.org.uk/blog/?p=34#comment-146</guid>
		<description>Yep - I would agree with that.. Thanks for the line.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yep &#8211; I would agree with that.. Thanks for the line.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://moreati.org.uk/blog/2009/02/09/self-decrypting-emails-considered-harmful/comment-page-1/#comment-137</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Feb 2009 12:54:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.moreati.org.uk/blog/?p=34#comment-137</guid>
		<description>The choice of software is important. Personally I wouldn&#039;t use Winencrypt as it appears to be closed source. Telling the difference between trustworthy encryption software, and snake oil is very hard. I can&#039;t do it, so I only trust encryption software that paranoid experts have chosen. 

However, outside of geek circles, simplicity and usability are more important. So Winencrypt might be better than nothing. The critical points though, are:
 - The encryption software must already be installed, so SDAs fail by design.
 - The users must be competent and confident using it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The choice of software is important. Personally I wouldn&#8217;t use Winencrypt as it appears to be closed source. Telling the difference between trustworthy encryption software, and snake oil is very hard. I can&#8217;t do it, so I only trust encryption software that paranoid experts have chosen. </p>
<p>However, outside of geek circles, simplicity and usability are more important. So Winencrypt might be better than nothing. The critical points though, are:<br />
 &#8211; The encryption software must already be installed, so SDAs fail by design.<br />
 &#8211; The users must be competent and confident using it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kraeverson</title>
		<link>http://moreati.org.uk/blog/2009/02/09/self-decrypting-emails-considered-harmful/comment-page-1/#comment-132</link>
		<dc:creator>Kraeverson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 20:15:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.moreati.org.uk/blog/?p=34#comment-132</guid>
		<description>What one needs to do is send authentication information over another channel. Some &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.winencrypt.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;encryption software&lt;/a&gt; will let you do that. So you can send a non-executable attachment, and transfer the key by other means.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What one needs to do is send authentication information over another channel. Some <a href="http://www.winencrypt.com" rel="nofollow">encryption software</a> will let you do that. So you can send a non-executable attachment, and transfer the key by other means.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
