Reply to topic

Encryption in kmail is way too complicated

78

Votes
85
7
User avatar incredion
Registered Member
Posts
87
Karma
0
OS
I like encryption as I think everybody has the right to communicate private things private.

Problem: even if kmail supports encryption fine but implementation and configuration of encryption keys and their handling is much too complicated.

Solution: There should be a wizard or something to configure and use encryption functionality without having to solve riddles what this and that function might be.
User avatar annew
Manager
Posts
1155
Karma
11
OS
The alternative, of course, is that you could read the instructions on userbase to set it up.


annew, proud to be a member of KDE forums since 2008-Oct and a KDE user since 2002.
Join us on http://userbase.kde.org
pp.f.
Registered Member
Posts
17
Karma
0
OS
I hope no one would make cryptography easy: if you loose the mechanism, you can not understand how to protect your data.
And soon encryption became normative and statuted, and soon and soon your data aren't protected anymore, you loosing the point, under the umbrella of law.
The User
KDE Developer
Posts
646
Karma
0
OS
???
Why shouldn't it be easy to use?
Compare it with Kopete's OTR-plugin. That's really a nice and simple interface...
pp.f.
Registered Member
Posts
17
Karma
0
OS
To be effective in its human component.

However, as you like: i used gpg in command line until last year and nothing force me to use it in the future
The User
KDE Developer
Posts
646
Karma
0
OS
Most KMail-users do not want to implement a new encryption protocol, but maybe they want simply use GPG to encrypt their emails. That is ineffective??
User avatar annew
Manager
Posts
1155
Karma
11
OS
This thread is totally pointless. Gpg has worked with KMail for several years, to my knowledge - probably much longer than I've been using it.

Most KMail users do not want to encrypt at all. It is their choice. Those that do will generally accept that it is wise to understand something about how encryption works, and be prepared to spend the time to learn about it.


annew, proud to be a member of KDE forums since 2008-Oct and a KDE user since 2002.
Join us on http://userbase.kde.org
The User
KDE Developer
Posts
646
Karma
0
OS
You could say the same for computers in general. Why should there be a desktop environment, a graphical installer...?
User avatar MirzaD
Registered Member
Posts
86
Karma
0
OS
I totally agree with this post, setting up encryption in kmail is way, way to complicated.

And I try not to ignore be astonished by idiotic comments like, why should it be simple... I mean really did you think for a second before typing that??
pp.f.
Registered Member
Posts
17
Karma
0
OS
yeah, i usually think. I think is idiotic make encyiption simple. bye
User avatar Hans
Administrator
Posts
3118
Karma
20
OS
Calling others comments idiotic isn't going to lead anywhere. If you don't agree with someone, please give arguments for why your way is better and skip the attacks on other people's opinions.


Problem solved? Please click on "Accept this answer" below the post with the best answer to mark your topic as solved.

Image
10 things you might want to do in KDE | Open menu with Super key | Mouse shortcuts
The User
KDE Developer
Posts
646
Karma
0
OS
Encryption is (like computers in general) useful for nearly everybody. So why shouldn't there be an "anybody-interface"?
User avatar MirzaD
Registered Member
Posts
86
Karma
0
OS
@Hans
you are right, but i didn't really thought he was serious with his comment, i thought it was just provoking...

Let me explain why encryption should be simple.
Encryption process it self should not be simple,
but using the encryption as a tool with Kmail should be simple.

Look at Mozilla thunderbird, process is so much painless than in Kmail.

I believe that encryption as a process of altering original message to (obfuscate) hide it content should not be simple, because it depends on complex mathematical algorithms, which are usually unsolvable like large prime number generation.

But can you tell my why should usage of encryption, inside Kmail, or any program for that matter, be complicated?
pp.f.
Registered Member
Posts
17
Karma
0
OS
you have to separate what is (3) encryption, what is a (2) digital signature, what are the (1) ciphers in their process and output.

1. it is obvious that a cipher is not matematically simple, neither in his alghoritm nor in his product. no one is idiot here.

2. a procedure to validate the provenience and the integrity of a message. in a binding (juridical) or social (keyservers and gpg/pgp) manner. out of any consideration of the real, physical world, privacy of the digital means of authentication (but the case of legally binding assumption, such as statuted measures of security).

3. a method to validate the privacy of the content of a message, neither of the privacy of the message itself nor of the secutiry of the digital component of the process (as in 2).

You have to pass-throught a step by step procedure that expose to you all technologically means of what you are doing, consenting to secure in the real world and in your mind the use of these means. If you will to use encription outside of the considerations of these aspects, to me you are using encription unnecessarly, and generating unnecessary internet traffic, so it is the bare minimum that you have to pain a litter suffer.

that's all for me, post closed. A goodwill man could find in the net all informations he want on the points supra.

Last edited by pp.f. on Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
pp.f.
Registered Member
Posts
17
Karma
0
OS
sorry for the bad english

 
Reply to topic

Bookmarks



Who is online

Registered users: Andreas Mair, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], capslock, einar, Exabot [Bot], garthecho, Google [Bot], Hans, koriun, Majestic-12 [Bot], rainbowgoblin, raymondsarver, rulet111, tparrott, urgo, Uri_Herrera, Yahoo [Bot]