Importantly, attorneys and clients do not communicate in a vacuum. When one scratches the surface behind the reflexive suggestion to require encryption, it becomes clear that the availability of technology, in and of itself, should not establish the key to ethical conduct. Pro-encryption proponents often assume that encryption use necessarily translates into greater security for client confidences. One cannot debate the result when encryption is used and deployed properly. Unfortunately, proper use and implementation does not always follow after an encryption program is loaded into a computer system.
People are the weakest link in any computer security scheme.
Encryption products, in turn, require that the sender AND the recipient understand how to use the technology. If the reasonableness of the technology were simply an educational concern, one might argue that proper training could remove any obstacles. Unfortunately, user ability is only one part of the equation. When examining the reasonableness of methods used to protect client confidences, it is important to look at the entire legal profession and client base. As one might guess, there are big differences.