IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: pgp signing in van

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Fri, 06 September 2013 13:18 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24EB521E80D4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 06:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7+aSv0YBTLFo for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 06:18:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from odin.smetech.net (mail.smetech.net [208.254.26.82]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEE3721F9D80 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 06:18:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [208.254.26.81]) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CA81F241A3; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 09:18:45 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smetech.net
Received: from odin.smetech.net ([208.254.26.82]) by localhost (ronin.smetech.net [208.254.26.81]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DYBxOznK-vFW; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 09:18:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [172.16.31.127] (wsip-70-164-41-66.dc.dc.cox.net [70.164.41.66]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ED4EF241A7; Fri, 6 Sep 2013 09:18:42 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: pgp signing in van
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
In-Reply-To: <522943D9.6030408@dcrocker.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2013 09:18:34 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B01F6815-114D-4A11-90E9-976FC2B42526@vigilsec.com>
References: <m2zjrq22wp.wl%randy@psg.com> <522943D9.6030408@dcrocker.net>
To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085)
Cc: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2013 13:18:46 -0000

Dave:

>> is pgp compromised?
> 
> PGP is a packaging method.  Absent grossly incompetent packaging -- and I've never heard claims that PGP or S/MIME were guilty of that -- my sense is that the interesting security mechanisms are the underlying algorithms.
> 
> Is there something about PGP that creates different exposures than S/MIME, in terms of those algorithms?  (Key management has obvious differences, of course.)

The biggest difference is PKI vs. web of trust.  You do not need a key signing event for a PKI -- you have already decided (or a vendor decided for you) to trust the Certificate Authority.

Russ

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email