RE: secure sign & encrypt
Terje Braaten <Terje.Braaten@concept.fr> Wed, 22 May 2002 16:28 UTC
Received: from above.proper.com (mail.imc.org [208.184.76.43]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA16615 for <openpgp-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 22 May 2002 12:28:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) id g4MGD8919587 for ietf-openpgp-bks; Wed, 22 May 2002 09:13:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from csexch.Conceptfr.net (mail.concept-agresso.com [194.250.222.1]) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g4MGD6L19581 for <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>; Wed, 22 May 2002 09:13:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by csexch.Conceptfr.net with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <LNARYMJ5>; Wed, 22 May 2002 18:10:36 +0200
Message-ID: <1F4F2D8ADFFCD411819300B0D0AA862E29ABE9@csexch.Conceptfr.net>
From: Terje Braaten <Terje.Braaten@concept.fr>
To: "OpenPGP (E-mail)" <ietf-openpgp@imc.org>
Subject: RE: secure sign & encrypt
Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 18:10:34 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by above.proper.com id g4MGD7L19584
Sender: owner-ietf-openpgp@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-openpgp/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-openpgp-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <ietf-openpgp.imc.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> -----Original Message----- > From: Derek Atkins [mailto:warlord@mit.edu] > Sent: 22. May 2002 16:09 [...] > No, the best way around this problem is the USER INTERFACE and > EDUCATION. If you receive a signed message that looks like: I have to disagree with you there Derek. It is not possible to write an user interface that automatically detects this problem if there is no support for it in the protocol. It has to be specified in the protocol that under a sign & encrypt operation the application MUST make an 'encrypted to' packet in the signature for each key the message and signature packet is encrypted to in the encryption packet. These 'encrypted to' packets MUST be in the signed part of the signature. An application that implement decrypt & verify MUST warn the user if the key used to decrypt the message is not found in an 'encrypted to' packet in the signature (if it is to be a good signature). No matter how much you try to educate your users, I think that yet for a few decades most people will think that when they receive an email that is both signed and encrypted, most will assume that they can be sure that the signer and the encrypter is the same person. I think it will be a very great improvement in the protocol to make it so that it really can be true. -- Terje BrĂ¥ten
- secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Hal Finney
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- Re: secure sign & encrypt vedaal
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Derek Atkins
- Re: secure sign & encrypt vedaal
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Derek Atkins
- Re: secure sign & encrypt vedaal
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Jon Callas
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- Re: secure sign & encrypt vedaal
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Derek Atkins
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Hal Finney
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Jon Callas
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Derek Atkins
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Peter Gutmann
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Matthew Byng-Maddick
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Dominikus Scherkl
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Derek Atkins
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Derek Atkins
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Derek Atkins
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- Re: secure sign & encrypt David P. Kemp
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Derek Atkins
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Matthew Byng-Maddick
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Dominikus Scherkl
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Dominikus Scherkl
- Re: secure sign & encrypt disastry
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- Re: secure sign & encrypt disastry
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Derek Atkins
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Derek Atkins
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Derek Atkins
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Derek Atkins
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Peter Gutmann
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Michael Young
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Paul Hoffman / IMC
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Brian M. Carlson
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Jon Callas
- Re: secure sign & encrypt Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
- RE: secure sign & encrypt john.dlugosz
- RE: secure sign & encrypt Terje Braaten