<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>
I use "SpiderOak" because it offers client-side encryption. It provides the security & privacy I seek.<br><br>I'd prefer to use Ubuntu One, but until it supports client-side AES 256-bit encryption & additionally encrypts the decryption key itself (like SpiderOak does) I won't even consider it.<br><br><br><div><div id="SkyDrivePlaceholder"></div><hr id="stopSpelling">From: jtodd929@hotmail.com<br>To: m@funkyhat.org; ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com<br>Subject: RE: Ubuntu One needs cloud encryption like LastPass does it<br>Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 08:57:19 -0400<br><br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=unicode">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft SafeHTML">
<style>
.ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P
{padding:0px;}
.ExternalClass body.ecxhmmessage
{font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma;}
</style>
<div dir="ltr">
Even assuming this is true, why is it still not a good idea for Ubuntu One to implement the same encryption setup of the user having the only key.<br><br><div><div id="ecxSkyDrivePlaceholder"></div>> From: m@funkyhat.org<br>> Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 02:00:20 +0000<br>> Subject: Re: Ubuntu One needs cloud encryption like LastPass does it<br>> To: jtodd929@hotmail.com<br>> CC: jordon@envygeeks.com; ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com<br>> <br>> On 23 March 2012 23:36, Jason Todd <jtodd929@hotmail.com> wrote:<br>> > Guys, please read these (or listen to the podcasts):<br>> > http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-256.htm<br>> > http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-257.htm<br>> ><br>> > Things being said seem to conflict with what I learned from this episode of<br>> > security now on how lastpass works. Essentially: LastPass is very secure and<br>> > no one can access the data except the user.<br>> <br>> LastPass may be secure today, but it is trivially easy for LastPass<br>> (or a hypothetical attacker who gains access to LastPass's<br>> infrastructure) to compromise that security simply by replacing the<br>> javascript code which does the client side encryption and decryption<br>> with some code that also passes the encryption key back up to the<br>> server (or wherever).<br>> <br>> -- <br>> Matt Wheeler<br>> m@funkyHat.org<br></div> </div>
<br>--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss</div> </div></body>
</html>