Re: Encrypted email

[Heather Flanagan <heatherf () STANFORD EDU>]

Hi Mike -

Voltage would have been better if we hadn't been required to "brand"  
it.  If we could have gone with a very black box-like solution, I  
think we'd have had better luck.  As is, my technical staff greatly  
fear the fragility of this service.

Between you and me, the problem Stanford has with encrypted email  
like this isn't the product, it's the various constituent  
requirements like branding, having this as convenient as "regular"  
email, and so on.

Thanks!


On Mar 18, 2008, at 1:09 PM, Mike Wiseman wrote:
> Heather,
>
> I would be interested to hear about your experience with the  
> Voltage product,  (called SecureMail?). My institution does not  
> currently support central email encryption but we’re running POC  
> testing of X.509 certs, cryptographic smartcards – S/MIME is one of  
> the areas of interest. But SecureMail looks interesting: clientless  
> encryption, decryption authenticated using central authentication  
> system, no user certs or keys to distribute/manage...
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> Mike Wiseman
> Computing and Networking Services
> University of Toronto
>
>
>
>
>
> For all of you out there handling HIPAA-protected email and other  
> restricted information -
>
> Do you use an email encryption service or application?  Stanford  
> University uses Voltage (http://www.voltage.com), and we're  
> starting a process to review the service overall to determine if  
> this is still the right solution for us today.  What's worked (or  
> not worked) for you?
>
> Thanks!
> Heather Flanagan
> Director, System Administration
> heatherf () stanford edu

Heather Flanagan
Director, System Administration
heatherf () stanford edu