Re: wl-fcc vs encrypted mails

[Michael Welle <mwe012008@gmx.net>]

Hello,

Ken Gunderson wrote:
> 
> At Sun, 08 Sep 2013 17:50:36 +0200,
> Michael Welle wrote:
> > 
> > Hallo,
> > 
> > Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Sun, 2013-09-08 at 13:49 +0200, Michael Welle wrote:
> > > > I utilise wl-fcc to store a copy of every mail I sent in an IMAP
> > > > folder. A drawback is that encrypted mails are stored, well,
> > > > encrypted. As a consequence that email's content can't be retrieved by
> > > > me anymore. How do you deal with this problem? What about storing the
> > > > mail in clear text and add an additional header indicating that this
> > > > mail was sent encrypted?
> > > 
> > > Regarding to security mails that were sent encrypted, should also be
> > sure, the filesystems on the mail server are encrypted as well as the
> > connections.
> > 
> > 
> > > stored encrypted. I know similar pseudo-issues using other MUAs and
> > > sometimes another level of security is needed, IOW it would be ok to
> > > sent mails encrypted, but then to store them decrypted, but for good
> > > reasons this shouldn't be a default for any MUA. Why can't you decrypt
> > > your own mails?
> > Because I need the private key of the recipient to decrypt the
> > mail. And for some reason she don't want to give the key to me.
> 
> Would kind of defeat the purpose of having a private key, no??
but, but... you can trust me...

 
> In light of recent NSA & Snowden events and quantum computing... it's
> probably a moot point anyhow :(
I really don't know what's going on. I like to think that all the
recent rumours are based on 'weaknesses' or backdoors in products like
VPN endpoints, closed source software systems, x509 certs from
commercial vendors, on weak passphrases etc. But I'm not an expert on
this things ;(. 

Regards
hmw


-- 
biff4emacsen - A biff-like tool for (X)Emacs
http://www.c0t0d0s0.de/biff4emacsen/biff4emacsen.html
Flood - Your friendly network packet generator
http://www.c0t0d0s0.de/flood/flood.html