-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Silk [mailto:michaelsilk@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, 24 January 2005 3:24 PM
To: lyal.collins@key2it.com.au; webappsec@securityfocus.com
Subject: RE: (secure email) Proposal to anti-phishing
Lyal said:
The difference is that client-side SSL exists today in an
industry
standard platform independent manner that could be effectively
deployed. (management is a different issue that I will be a
coward and
ignore for now.)
It's hard to see how changing the locaiton of a password
verification actually makes any difference to accountholder
security or phishing.
Is it? Surely it's easy to see. Phishing requries the user to enter
the password in a website. If they don't need to do this (or only
enter partial password) because of certificate, then I think it's
pretty easy to see how that is an advantage.
Seen the newer generaitons of phishing, where going to the faked bank site
loads up the user's PC with spyware, keyloggers et al?
Certificates are compromised as soon as any malware enters the machine -
which is useless in this phishing scenario.
And then there's the pragmatic fact that people will pay
Microsoft
protection-racket funds for Microsoft anti-spyware to protect
themselves transparently in the background from the
crappy software
Microsoft *SOLD* them in the first place...and they will do
this long
before they'll use any of the "secure email"
solutions today that require user interaction & thought.
But I'm all for an global standard secure email solution if
you happen
to have one of those handy,
Actually, my company does - if anyone wants to buy it.
Global, is it? Who buys it then? How does it work? Care to share more
details, because there is not much information on your site. Doesn't
seem any different to what PGP would provide.
It's also rather interesting that you claim it "encrypts" everything,
but also analyses it for spam, viruses ... now just how does it do
that :) ?
And what is "content checked". Seems far to "big brother" for
my liking.
