From:	"Mark L. Neidengard" <mneideng@****.CALTECH.EDU>
Subject:	Re: THUNDA - A complaint
Date:	Fri, 27 Dec 1996 11:12:56 -0800

According to Spike:
>|
>|In article <19961226.201256.4383.0.rasterburn@****.com>, Matthew T
>|Boutilier <rasterburn@****.COM> writes
>
>|Just a small complaint, but I am a little cheesed by this. If PRIVATE
>|doesn't mean anything anymore, then it would only be right to use some
>|other encryption. How does the list handle PRIVATE now then?????
>
>Ease up a bit....
>
>everyone makes mistakes sometimes....

I view a PRIVATE message as representing a communique routed through ShadowLand
from a specific account to a specific other account, presumably protected with
the 205x equivalent of PGP and quite secure under most circumstances. However,
I'd think that under _unusual_ circumstances, i.e. somone monitoring a
specific physical piece of the network over which a message flows, the
encryption could be broken. Also, at least where some of my characters are
concerned, some of them have a POP on the net that crosses some particularly
insecure _local_ infrastructure before getting to the backbone, and/or use
highly unconventional routes to the net (mobile sattelite uplink, etc.)

I agree that extra encryption can be taken to excess, but I think it's
appropriate in at least a certain set of cases. As I recall, the consensus
the last time it came up was to use it, if at all, within the
>>>>>[]<<<<< and
delimited by the appropriate +++++ marks.
--
/!\/!ark /!\!eidengard, CS Major, VLSI. http://www.cacr.caltech.edu/~mneideng
"Fairy of sleep, controller of illusions" Operator/Jack-of-all-Trades, CACR
"Control the person for my own purpose." "Don't mess with the Dark
Elves!"
-Pirotess, _Record_of_Lodoss_War_ Shadowrunner and Anime Addict