Comments on: CRTC Hearings Examine Canada's Internet Service Providers

By: Bruce Best

Bruce Best — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 12:34:15 +0000

I see the same question was asked by "Andrew" commenting on Jordan Furlong's law21.ca blog post from last year, The last days of e-mail, and I'm inclined to agree with his thought "The reason the majority of email is still not encrypted is because it requires some effort on the part of both the sender and receiver to implement." Because encryption is not 'standard', particularly for individual clients it would generally involve the lawyer having to become the techie for their clients as well.

By: Simon Chester

Simon Chester — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 23:02:06 +0000

My experience is that it is always a question on RFPs where in the technology section, firms are asked whether they support it.
Once the answer is given, it's remarkable that the clients and law firms both largely behave as if the issue had never been raised, since they both fear it will get in the way of communication.

By: Bruce Best

Bruce Best — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:18:14 +0000

On the issue of deep packet inspection, I'm curious how many firms actually use (or try to use) encrypted email. Seems like an obvious thing law firms should do, but as far as I know it is uncommon. Does anyone here use encrypted email in their firm?