Re: Proposed Proposed Statement on e-mail encryption at the IETF

"Joe Abley" <jabley@hopcount.ca> Tue, 02 June 2015 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <jabley@hopcount.ca>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D3EB1ACD52 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 08:02:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b4-b24C04J_s for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 08:02:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x231.google.com (mail-wi0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCAAC1ACAD4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 08:02:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wizo1 with SMTP id o1so148280698wiz.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 08:02:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hopcount.ca; s=google; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-type; bh=LCOqTSUZzYo1rSQiwSoi3JPUNgvZ3DHcnE3IyykA534=; b=QTbbQH0iT3A81nEexT5fUA0swKRk6RV4IPDLoZH5clbM2o1aSCAXSPia8uYQn4fqjO bzUkxUxFiKwSTV/UKkQCG+AZyMOEpIF2om8mwmcMEXRPBWw7HiAP/lJ6mxsbhkVOlvbQ 72/zuqDGKZ9gaI2RGfWFVVEzeUECUT0tbrrA4=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type; bh=LCOqTSUZzYo1rSQiwSoi3JPUNgvZ3DHcnE3IyykA534=; b=FW5sOuh72rwBmnWMS0l4W9SuExLbe6D5NwU+QY3rdJ/sES6mPiSP1hdDOR5nPtlgwV LmXv1QQtc7H0Tmz7vsoj4exdTJA6wZ81qAFO9WmP0KV2wgQwH0zcPTRob5Lf/lCtRUbd t+58u607DaGze1OAT5JSY4AJSCP/xc21Cz10lxMJM02kMhMRxa7EzzHAiP2dM4RA3JJC clS7QqM4m60uIO7b4VJNmJMBuYg30eSv1nwFWZxpgTQLVmMFttLR0E4UpOutcoY4LMXp cjR9SYxdddBgyGMSalUru8GQrxfud22mtbVtc5VWizSROkp8T+RPLshmNPBNW8pyq3Wl siMQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmQa2LMiBSCu5rE2++RspXcatIlOBP1hah7ukNthv8O5XOSIY9h++mAVVlFgejSIqeR3S16
X-Received: by 10.180.149.240 with SMTP id ud16mr31477303wib.7.1433257323649; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 08:02:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [197.4.16.76] ([197.4.16.76]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id o6sm22067711wiz.24.2015.06.02.08.02.01 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Jun 2015 08:02:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
Subject: Re: Proposed Proposed Statement on e-mail encryption at the IETF
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2015 16:01:59 +0100
Message-ID: <92C2CA39-3D09-42FF-9BFE-2D10344FA4C3@hopcount.ca>
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+LwjRgLV+26fOGKysa5JaS3_2qcHT=vB_rMjbPKyaSGagqQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <DD88F4E4-6BBA-4610-BB49-3158A26DF55B@hopcount.ca> <556DB997.6030800@cs.tcd.ie> <CAMm+LwjRgLV+26fOGKysa5JaS3_2qcHT=vB_rMjbPKyaSGagqQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.1r5084)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/K5ixozzSCmH5Yix4cWAvDSsOsk4>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 02 Jun 2015 15:02:06 -0000


On 2 Jun 2015, at 15:59, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:

> The bigger issue for me is 'mailing list'. I can easily write a 
> protocol
> for an end to end secure collaborative forum as a Web Service but 
> there is
> no way that I expect to do anything useful with legacy SMTP 
> infrastructure
> as the transport.

For what it's worth, the lists where I see encryption happening right 
now publish a public key for the list address and make the corresponding 
private key available to the mailing list software, which encrypts 
towards individual participants. So it's not end-to-end, it requires 
some centralised key management and the plain text of any encrypted 
message is exposed on the mailing list server.


Joe