IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Scope for self-destructing email?

Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@alumni.stanford.edu> Mon, 14 August 2017 20:05 UTC

Return-Path: <randy_presuhn@alumni.stanford.edu>
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 0BB75132391 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 13:05:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.921
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.921 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 U9bqdXIS2lgN for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 13:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg0-f50.google.com (mail-pg0-f50.google.com [74.125.83.50]) (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 9D89D126E64 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 13:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id i12so2809878pgr.3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 13:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Lj0ZU+u5i55v/keIkP6B64YeTQIsMuko+JL+cSSOBXA=; b=rJQyzlCeX+5gTVUbaxI83YSi7ORbdLDl7SNUSxO8dMdKAyGSH2mxbgx7qh/aP5lC8M xLzSMLwx0VabfhphiZcRt6SuBtW4ARZ7vMef3oo0i2SAtMgXyrpsBFOe9Du4LE+lNaqw AzY2grQaHJQPOasGL11F/zhNHoqwxCiBIBxyLuMMtYaui016yC+0Bm2E5JPIExAtlIBI Vvh16/L6qoIKTlRQ9DelnnZ/bMgFx+6tgXpmNQH2oZWAAasJ00Ad4h36nh/BZ+HkbKeD IHfQuI3YBsBML6BfF1iogW1wTGQSsPF8APhq3nbE4VwAMCpPFj0MIEGRgsv+n6Z0k6nn CVdQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5ithtRLjJBv6RE2TFZBAQ5s6pG+a0qdSpoIQATirih9UCh4Hy7y PBwEFnqcyzOxSOgF7HOUkw==
X-Received: by 10.99.97.10 with SMTP id v10mr16492951pgb.199.1502741137730; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 13:05:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.113] (c-24-130-218-233.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.130.218.233]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 133sm14541638pge.29.2017.08.14.13.05.36 for <ietf@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 14 Aug 2017 13:05:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Scope for self-destructing email?
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <bc180881-4562-4b97-a625-51ef29770d9f@email.android.com>
From: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@alumni.stanford.edu>
Message-ID: <6ce40fd4-3de7-b016-55f8-68b96df33333@alumni.stanford.edu>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 13:05:37 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <bc180881-4562-4b97-a625-51ef29770d9f@email.android.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/v4Lnzl-KvGTsVMPWvnckP9e0RR4>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 14 Aug 2017 20:05:40 -0000

Hi -

On 8/14/2017 12:53 PM, Matthias Merkel wrote:
> I think however that this system would mostly find use in systems like 
> governments or maybe communication between whistleblowers and news 
> outlets. In these cases you can trust the receipient server to delete 
> the message when being told to do so.

Which governments can actually be trusted to this extent?

More seriously, how could you have any confidence at all that
unauthorized (or even "lawful intercept") copies of the message
would be deleted?

Randy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email