full-disclosure - some interresting project i just stumbled across...

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: requiem at praetor.org (Jeremy Bishop)
Subject: some interresting project i just stumbled
	across...

On Friday 04 February 2005 07:14, Oliver Leitner wrote:
> I dunno whats this all of a sudden, but.
>
> 1. dunno what you have against my signature, btw, if you got a better
> idea or a better formulation for it, im open for it.

In general, confidentiality is only expected if you already have an 
agreement or working relationship where that is expected or agreed to.  
A message to a mailing list, as others have said, looks silly.  The 
notice does not have force just by being attached to an email; any 
force it does have derives from invoking such an existing climate of 
confidentiality.

If every message you send has such a notice attached, the recipient has 
no means of judging which messages should be considered confidential.  
Having the notice at the end of the email doesn't help either.

My suggestions:  if (and only if) a message would have an expectation of 
confidentiality it should be marked as such in the first line.  (I 
imagine you've seen a few spy movies; remember the documents with 
"Confidential: Eyes Only" notices at the top? Same concept.  You may 
find it appropriate to replace the "Eyes Only" part with "Do Not 
Forward Outside the Company" or "For Internal or Partner Use Only".)

(The above statements may be more or less true depending on the legal 
environment in your country of residence.  If you know of legislation 
or case law which significantly contradicts them, please post a 
reference. IANAL, etc.)

> after all im not the only one with such a signature here or on any
> other mailinglist, so why this all of a sudden reaction on it? arent
> you guys a bit late with that?

Yours included the "by reading this mail you agree" phrasing.  Also, we 
need to start somewhere, why not with yours?

> 2. i am not the web designer, but i forwarded that information to our
> webdesigner, thank you for the input:)

> > > --
> > > By reading this mail you agree to the following:
> > > using or giving out the email address and any
> > > other info of the author of this email is strictly forbidden.
> > > By acting against this agreement the author of this mail
> > > will take possible legal actions against the abuse.

-- 
The mome rath isn't born that could outgrabe me.
                        -- Nicol Williamson