You are of course correct that there is a 'chicken/egg' element to these kinds of discussions. Security would need to be transparent to the end-user to the maximum extent possible and the tools they use. On 6 Aug 2007, at 21:59, Bret Fausett wrote:
In my limited experience, I've found that secure, authenticated communications -- over the web, by email, IM, what have you -- are difficult because both sides to the communication need to have a shared understanding and common implementation of the security protocol. Even in my business, dealing lawyer to lawyer and lawyer to client (both situations where you'd think security, confidentiality and trust would demand secure and authenticated communications), I find that most lawyers and clients ask me to *stop* sending them messages with a digital signature...because their blackberry or some other handheld won't read it correctly...or because a webmail app won't read it correctly. So I see a real need to get apps in the hands of users that can handle security in an easy, transparent way and then to educate users about what the technology is, what it means to them, and how to use it. As far as ALAC and ICANN are concerned, I suppose I see the value ALAC could add as pushing information from ICANN security working groups out to the users.
Bret
_______________________________________________ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge- lists.icann.org --- Draft MoU with ICANN: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU
Draft Operating Principles: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP
Draft Code of Conduct: http://www.icannwiki.org/NARALO_Code_of_Conduct