Jim,

having talked to many IB customers in the past I think I know what the
problem is
here.

Those customers are mostly coming from desktop databases like paradox
and dBase,
where such an encryption existed - and could be broken anyway (like for
pdx you
can find a general password in the internet, hacked by some russian
programmer).

The problem is, that this is in the brains of people and even if you
tell them
it's unsecure they will insist this is better then nothing. They always
have this
horror, that their valued data is delivered on disk, non coded and can
be viewed
to anyone just using a disk editor. This is an irrational fear but
believe me,
it's much less work just implementing something then discussing this
over and
over again. This is a marketing feature, nothing else.

I know what hurts you deeply here, but this is one of the occasions
where its
better to have a "me to" on the feature list - knowing it is useless.

Best Regards,
Benny


Jim Starkey schrieb:

> At 11:04 PM 5/25/00 +0200, Steve Tendon wrote:
> >
> >Don't get me wrong: I'm not advocating "security-thru-obscurity". However, I
> >still don't feel we're getting any closer to a solution.
> >
>
> Steve, could you take a few minutes to describe exactly what the
> problem is, what the requirements for a solution might be, what
> VARs are currently doing with InterBase, and if you happen to
> know, what VARs are doing about the problem with other database
> systems?
>