Re: Encrypted SMTP (was Re: wish list)

[Ray Jones <rjones@pobox.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Sandy Harris <sandy.harris@sympatico.ca> writes:

> IPSEC can encrypt everything passing over an untrusted network.
> Linux IPSEC distribution is at:
> 
> http://www.xs4all.nl/~freeswan
> 
> With correct configuration and usage, this can provide some resistance
> to traffic analysis. You need some form of anonymus routing protocol
> as well to really defeat traffic analysis, though, and IPSEC does not
> provide that.

Encrypted SMTP and IPSEC address privacy at two different levels.  I'm
not experienced enough to know what's considered the correct thing,
though, when presented with encryption at two levels.  Is it better to
use both (in case one fails) or to just use one, given the unknown
nature of interactions between the ciphers.

Can anyone provide me pointers to analysis (or even some case studies)
involving this sort of multi-layer encryption?

Ray Jones
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v0.9.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE3ZDAAY4NKW4VSSGARAsJnAJ9/58kfdE0zfI379CHqFusb2UmSfwCfeJbe
ONgMYdMMSWUvZWMfTjKqb0E=
=WB5H
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
Securedistros: A common list for all secured Linux distributions
Archive:       http://humbolt.nl.linux.org/lists/