Re: What real users think [was: Re: pgp signing in van]

[Steve Crocker <[e-mail]>]

Yes, I am speaking of what would be possible today with a fresh start.  The fresh start would also include signatures and encryption as a required part of the design.  (If everyone has to have a key, the key management problems would be greatly reduced.)

Steve

On Sep 9, 2013, at 4:36 PM, Dave Crocker <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 9/9/2013 1:27 PM, Steve Crocker wrote:
>> Actually, I interpret the chemistry professor's comment in a
>> different light.  It would be possible to design a system where:
>> 
>> o the standard end user software doesn't facilitate editing the other
>> person's text, and
>> 
>> o each piece of text is signed.
>> 
>> The result would be a system where a recipient would know whether the
>> person who is alleged to have written a piece of the message actually
>> did so, and the normal mode of use would be to leave things
>> untouched.  Or, if you edit someone else's text, it immediately
>> becomes your text.
> 
> 
> The professor's comment was on function, not method. My comment was on
> the limitations to methods available at the time.
> 
> In a controlled environment, with good resources, quite a bit is
> possible. Indeed, server-based "department-level" email products in the
> 1980s did enforce such restrictions. The single-administration servers
> had complete control over the message.
> 
> Distribution with independent administrative authorities makes this a
> very different game. Enforcement by fiat is impossible.
> 
> That's where signing comes in, of course. Modify the content and the
> signature fails. Besides the computational overhead -- which was
> relatively onerous back when the infrastructure was being established --
> this requires that the receiver know and demand that the signature be
> present; this requirement has its own adoption barriers.
> 
> Starting with a blank sheet and today's technologies, the requirement is
> possibly feasible to satisfy -- if we ignore the continuing human
> factors barriers to large scale email authentication. However given the
> resources at the time the operational service was developed, I think it
> wasn't.
> 
> 
> d/
> -- 
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net