<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
</head>
<body smarttemplateinserted="true" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div id="smartTemplate4-template">Dear Patrick,
<br>
could you provide a download link? I would like to try again
(unfortunately I lost my passphrase so I had to wait until my
keyring revocation period expired) and maybe I can give some
feedback on ease of / UX improvements if you like.<br>
<br>
<br>
Axel<br>
</div>
<div id="smartTemplate4-quoteHeader">
<style type="text/css" scoped="">
#newHeaderAG1 b { font-weight:bold; color: #990033; }
</style><br>
<blockquote type="cite" style="margin-bottom: -20px !important;
padding-bottom:20px !important;">
<div id="newHeaderAG1" style="font-size: x-small; padding:1em;
background-color:rgba(220,220,240,0.4); border-radius:3px;"> <b>Subject:</b>
Re: Thunderbird and Pretty Easy Privacy - current status<br>
<b>From: </b>Patrick Cloke<br>
<b>To:</b> Tb-planning <br>
<b>Sent: </b>Thursday, 25/02/2016 20:20:41 20:20 GMT ST +0000
[Week 8]<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote class=" cite" id="mid_56CF6219_7040005_cloke_us"
cite="mid:56CF6219.7040005@cloke.us" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Ben,
I'm not sure if you've been following the conversation, but the points
you've brought up have been discussed in depth before.
On 2/25/16 2:35 PM, Ben Bucksch wrote:
> Patrick Brunschwig wrote on 25.02.2016 16:09:
>> But, and this is most important, PEP "only" provides services that are
>> a) invisible to users, and
>> b) quite easily pluggable into an application via a clearly defined API.
>
> Backdoors and insecure designs are invisible, too :).
>
> This needs serious investigation - on protocol design and code level -
> before we can integrate it.
>
> We'll also need review from a wide crypto community.
We (the Thunderbird community) recognize this and also recognize that
we're not crypto experts (i.e. we're not in a place to do this).
> Gervase Markham wrote on 25.02.2016 16:59:
>> True, but it's hard to evaluate something you've never seen.
>
> Exactly. That's my point.
>
> The 2 projects should rather approach each other and work together,
> and in the process build mutual trust, than TB kicking back and
> waiting for a finished PEP product, and then simply saying yay/nay.
> That's not likely to be a fruitful process, IMHO.
We've been in discussions with pEp and have had conversations with them
about their technology. The keyword in the statement was an *alpha*
version. This implies that there is still time to change
direction/influence designs.
Note that some of us did see a version of pEp's software for Outlook
last fall, but how exactly it would work within Thunderbird has not been
discussed as a detailed plan nor as a prototype.
--Patrick
_______________________________________________
tb-planning mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tb-planning@mozilla.org">tb-planning@mozilla.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning">https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>