Re: [openpgp] signed/encrypted emails vs unsigned/unencrypted headers

Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org> Wed, 17 July 2013 09:34 UTC

Return-Path: <wk@gnupg.org>
X-Original-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D95CE21F995A for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 02:34:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 uAKCAT-L3z7E for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 02:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kerckhoffs.g10code.com (kerckhoffs.g10code.com [217.69.77.222]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EE7021F94DC for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 02:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uucp by kerckhoffs.g10code.com with local-rmail (Exim 4.80 #2 (Debian)) id 1UzO87-0003jD-Iw for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 11:34:39 +0200
Received: from wk by vigenere.g10code.de with local (Exim 4.80 #3 (Debian)) id 1UzO3P-0008Pa-3k; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 11:29:47 +0200
From: Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org>
To: Ximin Luo <infinity0@gmx.com>
References: <51D360B2.1070709@gmx.com> <51E4FEF0.7010004@gmx.com> <87fvvekji2.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <51E50442.8050701@gmx.com> <877ggqkemm.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <51E5C397.6050403@gmx.com> <87bo61hbog.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <51E64F5D.9000203@gmx.com>
Organisation: g10 Code GmbH
X-message-flag: Mails containing HTML will not be read! Please send only plain text.
OpenPGP: id=1E42B367; url=finger:wk@g10code.com
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 11:29:47 +0200
In-Reply-To: <51E64F5D.9000203@gmx.com> (Ximin Luo's message of "Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:01:33 +0100")
Message-ID: <87y595fsac.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: openpgp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [openpgp] signed/encrypted emails vs unsigned/unencrypted headers
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <openpgp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/openpgp>
List-Post: <mailto:openpgp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:34:47 -0000

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 10:01, infinity0@gmx.com said:

> I don't see how this is significant - is it such a conceptual stretch to
> imagine headers and the body being encrypted separately? Or do you mean that
> RFC 822 does not support this?

MIME supports this.  But it does not care about the outer header.
Partly because it carries the meta data required for parsing MIME.

If you like to encrypt the subject, you may simply use a single line
base64 encoding of the an OpenPGP encrypted message.  But there are
problems.  Imagine that you need to encrypt to several recipients with
the resulting line extending to over 989 characters - which violates
rfc822.

> Which mailing list, then? pgp-mime has been shut down and redirected to this

Feel free to use the gnupg-users list.  Over the years this kind of
ideas have been discussed there several time.  Or any other MUA related
list.


Shalom-Salam,

   Werner

-- 
Die Gedanken sind frei.  Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.