Email "with current encryption technologies" is arguably one of the most
secure methods of communication at present. The problem which isn't always
appreciated with unencrypted email is that when sent over the Internet, it
passes via several - sometimes many - other computers, which are completely
out of the control of the sender and recipient. Messages can be read by
anyone who has access to any of those computers - which will usually mean
hundreds if not thousands of folk. They may all be able to read, copy,
delete, alter etc anything which passes. (Hence the stupidity of putting
words to the effect that "This email is confidential" in the so-called
disclaimer at the end of an unencrypted mail!)
Apologies if grandmothers and eggs are relevant at this point.
Tim
--
Tim M. Wright
Director - Technology Audit
Charles Schwab Europe
Tel: +44 190 852 7793
Mobile: +44 7932 669 074
Fax: +44 190 852 7593
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Bayliss [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 02 October 2001 12:35
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Security Issues
>
> I have recently been advising our Social Work about
sending information
> through e-mail especially sensitive information e.g.
details of individual's
> mental health etc. and advising that it is not secure.
Whilst it is true that email is not totally secure, I wonder
what
alternatives can be used. Letters are certainly not; they
are
commonly delivered to the wrong recipients, are often
delivered to
mailboxes with little or no security and it is not that
unusual for
mailbags to be left unattended for both external and
internal postal
systems.
Faxes are little better, as the machines are often communal
within
offices. Most signed for services will accept signatures
from people
other than the recipient and nearly all will accept
signatures from
people claiming to be the recipient without ID; checking IDs
is an
option that some courriers offer, but how commonly is this
used?
Person to person hand delivery is not always a practical
option. In
comparative terms, email is arguably no worse in terms of
security
than any alternative that is likely to be used. Email
potentially
offers more secure communication than most alternatives with
current
encryption technologies.
This question crops up from time to time in relation to
email in
various areas of work, and it is common for people to fall
back on
other means of communication which have been used
traditionally
without a thought for whether they are any more secure in
practical
terms.
I'd certainly be interested in other people's views and
experiences in
this area.
Chris Bayliss
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/user-manual/summary-user-commands.htm
all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list
please!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
_______________________________________
WARNING: All e-mail sent to or from this address will be received by
the Charles Schwab Corporate E-mail system and is subject to archival and
review by someone other than the addressee.
Charles Schwab Europe.
Cannon House, 24 Priory Queensway, Birmingham B4 6BS, United Kingdom.
Charles Schwab Europe is a member firm of the London Stock Exchange and LIFFE and
regulated by The Securities and Futures Authority
Registered Office: As Above. Registered in England No. 2092410 VAT Registration No. GB 486 894471
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/user-manual/summary-user-commands.htm
all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|