6 ms·
you are pointing out valid concerns. in terms of end-to-end encryption, what kind of client-encryption do you have in mind? usually, this involves steps that r
by phoet 12y ago
you are pointing out valid concerns.
in terms of end-to-end encryption, what kind of client-encryption do you have in mind? usually, this involves steps that regular internet-users are not able or willing to handle. that's why i think such a service might be a great thing.
to your second point, how would you ever be able to proof that?
- mbenjaminsmith 12y agoThose are really good questions. > in terms of end-to-end encryption, what kind of client-encryption do you have in mind? I didn't have something in mind, but Stanford has a good, relatively hard to screw up (by configuration) JS crypto library. But that's only part of the battle since we can't trust the delivery channel or the browser. > usually, this involves steps that regular internet-users are not able or willing to handle. That's right and underlines the single biggest reason crypto isn't really used by most people apart from HTTPS. > to your second point, how would you ever be able to proof that? That's a really interesting question. It might not be provable. I wasn't trying to be cryptic (excuse the pun) but that was really the point I was making.