[messaging] OpenPGP Trust is broken Was: On Signed-Only Mails

[Natanael]

Den 8 dec. 2016 2:10 em skrev "Phillip Hallam-Baker" <phill at hallambaker.com
>:

All documents should be signed but only confidential documents need to be
or should be encrypted.


There's another problem too. Not all signatures should be permanent, nor
public.

Sometimes integrity and authentication needs to be ephemeral. Most people
have already acknowledged that for IM (Signal), but seems to forget it (or
at least doesn't mention it) as soon as the context is changed.

I want to know my drafts aren't tampered with as I work on them over time,
but I do not want anybody to be able to tie them to me after the fact. I
want to chose when to make something publicly / irrevocably tied to me. No
more information should be revealed (provable) than necessary.

We could already just design a Signal protocol style 1-n party
single-message authentication scheme, by essentially defining some specific
way of sending a hash of the message to the intended recipients in the same
way Signal initiates conversations.

Mixed with time limited master keys and purpose-specific keys, it would
drastically reduce the impact of data breaches.

A bank which which gets their data leaked can protect their customers
better if they can significantly reduce the certainty that the leaked data
is correct. Internal data should only be verifiable internally.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://moderncrypto.org/mail-archive/messaging/attachments/20161208/1ed7045f/attachment.html>