Re: [lamps] Proposed addition of header protection to the LAMPS charter

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor <[e-mail]>]

On Tue 2018-11-06 11:57:54 +0700, John Levine wrote:
> In article <[e-mail]> you write:
>>3) If it results in an RFC, would you implement?
>
> Not to be an old grouch or anything, but anything that affects mail
> user interfaces is dismayingly hard to do well and easy to do in ways
> that nobody wants to use.  When we were looking at anti-DMARC hacks
> for the IETF mailing lists I wrote a mail reflector that wrapped
> messages in various ways and sent them back so people could see how
> they looked in their mail programs.  The only thing that was
> consistent from one MUA to another was that they looked awful.

John, if you have the infrastructure set up to generate screenshots of
e-mail messages on multiple MUAs (particularly those that handle message
encryption and/or signatures), i'd love to take advantage of it!  If
it's something you can share, please let me know (off-list is fine if
it's not something you can make broadly public).

> I think header protection is a fine idea, but without some code to try
> and see if it's usable, we're far too likely to end up with yet
> another paper spec.

There are multiple clients already doing header protection today,
interoperably (e.g. enigmail and K-9 mail).  This is not a code-free
exercise :)

         --dkg