Encrypting in Networking: Implications of Unencrypted Data

  • Thread starter Thread starter Reshma
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
Encryption in networking is crucial for secure communication between parties who may not know each other and are vulnerable to attacks, such as man-in-the-middle attacks. Public key cryptography, combined with authentication services like Kerberos, is essential to protect data during transmission. Unencrypted information sent over the internet can be intercepted by third parties, posing risks such as account hacking and data theft. Browsers may indicate when information is unencrypted, highlighting the potential for exposure.The discussion reveals that while encryption protects data privacy, it does not inherently prevent malware or viruses, which can be delivered via unencrypted channels. Users are cautioned against sharing sensitive information on unencrypted sites, as there are limited measures to secure accounts in such environments. Misunderstandings arise regarding the definitions of malware and encryption, with some conflating the two concepts. Ultimately, while encryption is vital for privacy, it does not directly correlate with the risk of malware, which can infiltrate systems regardless of encryption status.
  • #31
TsunamiJoe said:
I wasn't speaking of port blocking, but when requiring a set of passwords of which are encrypted so that they can be planely seen, except by the other communicating machine.
You didn't realize you were talking about port blocking, but you were. There are no port-level cryptographic authorization schemes. You can deny connections by IP, but that's about it. Anyone can connect to an open port on another machine. Authorization using cryptography is done by a server servicing that port at the application level -- much, much higher than the port itself.
This is not entirely so, when using a file sharing program, most often the program will merely know your IP, so that someone wanting access to the information being sent could merely "spoof" there IP and pretend they were one of the machines(personaly i would say that the user receiving the file would be the one to spoof, as to promote less work by the middleman in not having to get into the other persons system prior, but to instead just walk into the connect) then simultaniously send it out to the real user spoofing the senders' IP.
And where would the real packets go? Would you just use your super-laser-ray and obliterate them off the ethernet wires?
I was not claiming your ignorance, I'm merely presenting another side to an arguement, and if you wish to degrade to using pety comments such as this to proove your point, then I no longer have any position in this debate anymore. It was nice, and a great debate while it was being upheld properly. I hope you, Reshma, got the answers you were seeking.
We're not conducting a debate. You're saying things that are wrong. I, and others, are correcting you. Whether or not it's worth doing, only you can say.

- Warren
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K