IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: pgp signing in van

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Fri, 06 September 2013 02:54 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 459F611E8221 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Sep 2013 19:54:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.56
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.56 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.039, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 12t6bvUW2tyH for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Sep 2013 19:54:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C5FC11E8222 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Sep 2013 19:54:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.66] (76-218-9-215.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.9.215]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r862sVM9008894 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 5 Sep 2013 19:54:34 -0700
Message-ID: <522943D9.6030408@dcrocker.net>
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2013 19:54:17 -0700
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Subject: Re: pgp signing in van
References: <m2zjrq22wp.wl%randy@psg.com>
In-Reply-To: <m2zjrq22wp.wl%randy@psg.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.66]); Thu, 05 Sep 2013 19:54:34 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: IETF Disgust <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
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 02:54:43 -0000

On 9/5/2013 5:45 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
> 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.)

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email