[liberationtech] Fwd: Asyncronous secure messaging (Email): Why reinvent the wheel?

[R.R. D.]

Fabio, Edwin, what about a hybrid option? http://bitmail.sf.net
it supports IMAP email (could be extended with PGP) and secure p2p Email,
so the postbox is your (third) email partner.
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Jacob-Appelbaum-Schafft-die-E-Mail-ab-1966786.html
But as you read, others are as well not comfortable with a hybridity with
@Mail.
Regards

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Edwin Chu <edwincheese at gmail.com>


Why is it better to limit our innovation to the existing standards when
creating the nonexistent secure messaging system? Sometimes we could
improve security of a system by adding layers to it, like HTTPS and ZRTP;
sometimes hacking on a legacy protocol isn't good enough and we create new
things. After all, even we just add a new layer to existing standards, we
are creating new standards. While resemblance to existing protocol may
boost software adoption, I don't see it is wrong to design a new protocol
(having it based on existing one or not) and then make it a de
facto/official standard.

Edwin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/attachments/20131109/4aee7f25/attachment.html>