, 2006-05-30
Kelly Martin takes a step back from e-mail's unstoppable phishing-virus-spam epidemic and imagines a world where secure e-mail could be the next big killer app.
Expand all |
Post comment
Rubbish! What are the probIem ISSUES ????
2006-05-31
Dom De Vitto (1 replies)
Dom De Vitto (1 replies)
Re: Rubbish! What are the probIem ISSUES ????
2006-06-01
Jeff H (1 replies)
Jeff H (1 replies)
Re: Re: Rubbish! What are the probIem ISSUES ????
2006-06-01
Anonymous (1 replies)
Anonymous (1 replies)
Re: Re: Re: Rubbish! What are the probIem ISSUES ????
2006-06-06
Jeff H (1 replies)
Jeff H (1 replies)
Um, I Have Your Solution
2006-06-01
Reynolds Kosloskey (3 replies)
Reynolds Kosloskey (3 replies)

In my opinion the analogies that you draw on in your post seem overly generalized. For example, you say that we use the postal mail system without attempting to use a sender authentication system--even though bad things are sent through postal mail.
While this is true, there are other differences between the two types of communications. For starters, it is significantly cheaper to send millions of e-mails than it is to send millions of traditional letters. The cost in itself is a barrier to postal junk mail. It is very possible things would be different if sending a letter was as "free" as sending an email. Also, I'm guessing that dropping 10 million letters similar to the fake bank account info request emails we have all seen into local blue USPS box (if you're in the US) would end in an unexpected lunch date with several agents from a three letter government agency.
You make comparisions such as this throughout your argument, but I believe that the fact of the matter is that SPAM, malware, and phishing have become serious problems that affect the vast majority of computer users--whether end users who are annoyed, confused, mislead, or worse, or system administrators who are left to attempt to prevent/clean up the mess.
Also, regardless of your opinion of unskilled computer users, your idea of limiting computer use to those who can operate one "with the required skill and attention" would limit computer use to very very few people. At this point that is just not going to work. It seems strange to me that someone that seems to be arguing for "a free and open Internet" would also argue to limit or "license" computer users as we do with motor vehicles.
I'm not suggesting rfid chips, id cards, or a global registry, but I do think it is important that we at least recognize the problem as a problem. Over and over it seems that we (meaning society, government, users, etc) incorrectly rely on pre-computer technology to govern how we develop and use newer technologies. This has, in my opinion, lead to many or most of the problems with e-mail, DRM and copyright issues, patents, and more. This is a different era that we're in, and I think the problems that we face now need and deserve to be looked at in a different light.
[ reply ]
Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/404/33797#33797