Necessity of GPG when using SSL

[Benjamin Esham]

On Feb 22, 2006, at 6:22 AM, Janusz A. Urbanowicz wrote:

> And there is really no point in ecryptiong the whole access since the
> contents, the emails usually travel the rest of the net unencrypted.

But wouldn't it be much easier for an attacker to intercept all of your
e-mail by listening in on an unencrypted webmail session than by  
trying to
intercept each e-mail individually somewhere else?  I think there  
certainly
is a benefit to having SSL-encrypted webmail for exactly that reason:  
less
determined attackers will not have access to the plaintext of the  
messages.
(Although granted, it would be kind of foolish to depend upon SSL  
webmail if
the messages are sent in plain text.)

--
Benjamin D. Esham
bdesham at gmail.com  |  http://bdesham.net  |  AIM: bdesham128
Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia  •  http://en.wikipedia.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : /pipermail/attachments/20060222/01a7a454/PGP.pgp