[sub] [Sussex] re:- Phil Turners last post

[Nicholas Butler]

Cheers Steve...


okay lets get into this <grin>

>Yes there are times when sending a link is the best way to disseminate
>a document's content.  But your solution will not work in every situation.
>  
>
Okay ... but I dont believe I can think of any technical Solution that 
works in every situation. In fact I believe the generalisation of Email 
leads to its flexibility.  So im not interested in analysing a specific 
case  that narrows down the solution to a point where the answer fails 
to operate in the given scenario, since we can do this for any technical 
answer.


And so far no one has disputed that people want to associate a file with 
a communication.

>Nik, what if 3ait and uThink where involved in complex talks about a new
>kill app that would take over the world and establish our two companies
>  
>
You see , here is where youve gone to a specific within the context of 
this thread and I would point out that large or small my RFC for the MTA 
delivery of attachments would still deliver on its requirements.


>If you wanted to send me your latest changes to the-master-plan.txt are
>you going to have that placed on a public FTP server for all to read?
>Even if you encrypt the document it is still weaker then encrypting it
>and sending it as an attachment in an e-mail.
>  
>
Im not suggesting a FTP or HTTP server per se, although the technology 
is where you wish to implement a answer. Also note that my RFC suggest 
that the MTA is responsible for stripping the attachment outbound and 
storing this at some secure location with relevant authentication applied.

I dont beleieve the arguement for better security through profundity 
works either since if Mark H wants to access the document in the current 
schema he can choose to attack more than one site. This also means that 
should he gain access to the document then a aguement could be made from 
Either company that the other was lax in its security over protecting 
the Intellectual property.

Meanwhile if im responsible for the MTA and more thant the recipient is 
able to collect the file then there can really be only one person 
responsible for that security of that server.


Document Obsolensence and Old documents and historic Sent documents is a 
problem. yes. But now were into the realms of ISO and British Standards. 
But let me address it like this...

When you receive the attachment you generally use some variety of SAVE 
as at some point. If however you simply leave the attachment, choosing 
to store it in your inbox or some folder then you have that privilege.

In the new MTA it would have to be established that the recipient would 
have downloaded a copy , therefore you dont delete form the MTA 
_FILE_STORE files which are unviewed. Now this allows another feature of 
Auditing and Accounting for every file sent and every file viewed.



Now if they do copy the document, whilst you view it at square zero lets 
now examine the case for unwarranted .zip files sent by sucker X. Since 
the FIle is most likely Spam/Junk/Virus there is now the ability of 
Virus Software or "aware" users to respond to the MTA_FILE_STORE_manager 
that the file is unwarranted and should be restricted until it can be 
approved by the originating user. 


>To summarize: The more flexible a system is the more it can be shaped in
>  
>
yes but youvenot really addressed the concerns withing the issue of 
Email that currently it carries more Payload than Pay off within its 
attachments.

Your arguement is the case that the Mail System should be left alone and 
unrestricted. I agree with this precept. Im suggesting however that the 
File Swapping mechanism of Attachments needs revisiting since its 
"quite" clearly creating more work and effort than benefits.

>When systems are flexible it not only becomes possible to use them in
>  
>
Id argue that there is now more flexibility in the new MTA requirement 
and it delivers better accounting and security for File delivery to 
users via EMAIL , which is currently a major headache for many corporates.


>It must, therefore, be a priority to educate people to use those systems
>  
>
Well in this environment we no longer need to educate the users, since 
its apparent that we can deliver a fix to the mechanisms that enables 
the users to have more protection.

>To summarize the summary: Flexibility leads to invention and the creation 
>of wealth, but people need to be educated to use the tools at their 
>disposal wisely.
>  
>
Thats 2 summaries <Grin> anyway , how is my suggestion less flexible ?  
As i see it the benefits of the new system would be

1. Reduction in Bandwidth for Mail Delivery between MTAs.
2. Increase in Auditing and maintaining files delivered and received.
3. Faster ability to respond to Junk Files and Virus files without user 
interception.



>To summarize the summary of the summary: People are the problem!
>  
>
Yes, remind me then ... Was it computers or people that wrote the 
software which we all love and enjoy ?