IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: not really pgp signing in van

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Mon, 09 September 2013 21:36 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.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 9E7E921F9C12 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 14:36:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.300, 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 F+67HtkqGaSm for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 14:36:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from leila.iecc.com (leila6.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:4c:6569:6c61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F81711E80F8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 14:36:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 30460 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2013 21:36:37 -0000
Received: from leila.iecc.com (64.57.183.34) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 9 Sep 2013 21:36:37 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=522e3f65.xn--yuvv84g.k1309; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=7qdyuw2xiybkaq5MhzdnF8MrWvv1tZjgTobyH+Q5T0s=; b=fsQZ9k3yVMqjrwPj3MPMYK99Lnm7k6mZVUCXmq6orwrmab+4F5hFAqftd8sa6vD6p7D9OAqptgLRrgj+5/Kzie7GC/fsbUMVqldliZhVkT3lVnSMSRC8umR011ylMBK+uVk+CI/yt0eM/5Tl5Fa0dFCGeP+24cftWsLhXDIIjvKwxicc2NfL4Jf4SDxuJwbNJ6qfGEBVAet8U1icxyORR4X/6TCRnvOVGgLhUE7pzYE83gYm33P+FB70aKGkA89L
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=522e3f65.xn--yuvv84g.k1309; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=7qdyuw2xiybkaq5MhzdnF8MrWvv1tZjgTobyH+Q5T0s=; b=pugumMZSgrlcyusSd3WCJzgVCDVAflS/7u6M+eKJRcaYkx+4t1rbM9INy2wVp4MyEWeJu6xtc9Rdg0Z/x9ne5T80Q4Bm25JgXkdS3VQsWFUJFf+QHICHZSPnyEFGHyPePy1ZaZPJtdLpxCzlQZ3klPSidLLXn6QoE90BAD9NgqyPWUgNvRZLF1Bk3FxBL4WpktHSV+wqhiG4Ugwh1FNPqFXc0D4mOlRysscfmAcQkL1g4hcAXqrfdvki93PWLPzG
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 21:36:15 -0000
Message-ID: <20130909213615.33324.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: not really pgp signing in van
In-Reply-To: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B63077527D64A@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
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: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 21:36:48 -0000

>> Yes, they should have made that impossible.
>
>Oh my, I _love_ this!   This is actually the first non-covert use case I've heard described,
>although I'm not convinced that PGP could actually do this without message format tweaks.

Sounds like we're on our way to reinventing S/MIME.  Other than the
key signing and distribution (which I agree is a major can of worms)
it works remarkably well.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email