[openpgp] email death certificates

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Fri, 23 August 2019 18:04 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
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 E1CA912009E for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 11:04:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 T2wNCyxVc3vI for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 11:04:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [176.58.120.209]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F01CA12006A for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 11:04:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dooku.sandelman.ca (CPE788a207f397a-CMbc4dfb96bb50.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [174.116.121.43]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 125FA1F45E for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:04:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dooku.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id A173B3FB5; Fri, 23 Aug 2019 14:05:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Attribution: mcr
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 14:05:00 -0400
Message-ID: <5409.1566583500@dooku.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/LwXYUsXgPxyQSZnVNY1lWCWqcKY>
Subject: [openpgp] email death certificates
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:04:36 -0000

I had the unfortunate duty to remove an email address from a community
email list because the person had passed away.  I wonder how many other
lists this rather active person is on, and how many years it will be
before the lists are cleaned up.

When my dad passed away in the fall of 2003, it wasn't until the end of April
the following year that the University cleaned up his email account.  There
was clearly a need to keep the account open for quite some time due to
other university business that hadn't yet closed.

I was thinking this morning about an SMTP responses, a 55x-type,
but it rather needs to be signed.  Sigh, 2019, and still not enough
useful email security to do this.  But still.

Is there something in openpgp spec that I'm missing here?
I don't think that revoking the key is the right thing.
In particular, nobody may know how to find the private key to revoke it.
What's wanted is a revocation of the PGP signature with a reason.

Has anyone given any thought to this?

I suppose it might also apply to "does not work here anymore"

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-