Re: mail signing history, was Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Thu, 19 November 2020 00:23 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
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 AE4D43A0FF0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:23:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.989
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.989 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
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 p_8YWSwjpfHW for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:23:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B6173A100E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:23:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0AEABE3E; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:23:12 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 68MRcojrUTLN; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:23:11 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [10.244.2.119] (95-45-153-252-dynamic.agg2.phb.bdt-fng.eircom.net [95.45.153.252]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0E738BE2F; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:23:11 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1605745391; bh=9Hv6mfxx+TdBNUl2OwY9uPuEIthWxCNJLRlMLcH2zKY=; h=To:References:From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=zukDajOFud9JsBmjcRJb0ZRdr76c0ZaVw5e3q9SX17gZ8vtaHkLMbK0ILy2Pb/JGs csj9K5MSP7N8yYBeqRfABRNQ++bm1ASlPhP0yXB68iryFqJO/OMCvexL4Rlef/Wi3A spHtOf0sr5By5YTFntN+I+NQKT2J7y8mBVMq9hxs=
To: Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com>, ietf@ietf.org
References: <01RS5CFAY5S0005PTU@mauve.mrochek.com> <20201118211937.01A22278DC6F@ary.qy> <01RS5Q2L2D6Y005PTU@mauve.mrochek.com> <5239b5-3d2-4079-5f5d-f4a2e0c5552@taugh.com> <c9c6d83e-cf79-262e-ae0e-361050026912@mtcc.com> <e6c9a6b0-f412-76f0-24a4-d11512c1be36@cs.tcd.ie> <5b56c99c-d4ee-1275-5479-3aef9ab2ab11@mtcc.com> <abb3c271-7a9a-b3bc-1f4a-c68b2f55b35d@cs.tcd.ie> <20eacf90-c670-02b3-c1d9-4de0574f7a05@mtcc.com> <68124f0a-23ef-80d5-6253-4c150e5048cb@cs.tcd.ie> <e8a0dc17-780d-7b95-bb99-3863f6207679@mtcc.com>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Subject: Re: mail signing history, was Call for Community Feedback: Retiring IETF FTP Service
Message-ID: <69574c25-28fd-3267-c6d0-212a4d4fde9c@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:23:10 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.3.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <e8a0dc17-780d-7b95-bb99-3863f6207679@mtcc.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="oaQkeKPlK0sr7BRYpVtYceGS8xQPO0FHj"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/vtcEzsXlFY32xQwh2nOZLPr7Vsc>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:23:26 -0000

Hiya,

On 18/11/2020 22:56, Michael Thomas wrote:
> Given that the internet is forever on 
> so many other levels, publishing private keys seems too little, too late.

I think your conclusion there is a thing where reasonable
people can disagree as to possible outcomes.

I don't think it's too late if there is some sufficient new
benefit accruing to a private key publisher. And that may be
the case as already discussed.

I don't think it's too little either - since everything else
in a leaked mail or message store is freely malleable, access
to the relevant private key is arguably not too little.

There's still plenty of possibility for this not getting
used, but I think it worth a bit of effort to try find
that out. (And, I admit, part of me likes the idea of
publishing private keys for virtuous reasons:-)

S.