10 Sep
2004
10 Sep
'04
8:46 a.m.
Hello people,
I was having a small think about Signing/Crypting Mails.
To propagate the thought of protecting your privacy how much of a sense
would this scenario make:
My mum has an e-mail address and I want to make sure it's REALLY her and
when she mails me her super secret recipes that none else can read it.
Therefor I generate a PGP key for her but with no password or (if
possible) I store the passphrase in the password manager.
Advantage even if someone will intercept my message it is still crypted
and I know it's my mum!
If it's a Single User PC wouldn't it make sense?
If it's multiuser and "basic" login password protection is present and
the right permissions are on the key wouldn't it make sense?
Thoughts?
Cheers,
Steve Clement
Better living through Mum's Crypted Recipes!
--
ION Network Solutions
Steve Clement
Unix System Administrator
209, rue des Romains
L-8041 Bertrange
Tel: +352 261 276-2
Fax: +352 261 276-9
mailto:steve@ion.lu
http://www.ion.lu
10 Sep
10 Sep
5:31 p.m.
Steve Clement wrote:
Advantage even if someone will intercept my message it
is still crypted
and I know it's my mum!
If you want to be sure that your mum sent the mail, it needs to be
signed with her private key. Which means that everybody can read it, as
you only need her public key for that. Hence, the mail is not encrypted,
only signed.
If she wants to sign and encrypt at the same time, she you must apply
both her private key and your public key in turn to the same mail.
-pu
11 Sep
11 Sep
5:42 a.m.
This e-mail is certified, using PKI technique. You can fetch details on
CaCert.org.
If you apply freely to such a certificate, once the first e-mail has
been exchanged (this one), you can reply a both CRYPTED and CERTIFIED way.
Steve Clement wrote:
Hello people,
I was having a small think about Signing/Crypting Mails.
To propagate the thought of protecting your privacy how much of a sense
would this scenario make:
My mum has an e-mail address and I want to make sure it's REALLY her and
when she mails me her super secret recipes that none else can read it.
Therefor I generate a PGP key for her but with no password or (if
possible) I store the passphrase in the password manager.
Advantage even if someone will intercept my message it is still crypted
and I know it's my mum!
If it's a Single User PC wouldn't it make sense?
If it's multiuser and "basic" login password protection is present and
the right permissions are on the key wouldn't it make sense?
Thoughts?
Cheers,
Steve Clement
Better living through Mum's Crypted Recipes!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Lilux-info mailing list
Lilux-info(a)lilux.lu
http://lilux.lu/mailman/listinfo/lilux-info
--
Brent Frère
Private e-mail: Brent(a)BFrere.net
Postal address: 5, rue de Mamer
L-8280 Kehlen
Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg
European Union
Mobile: +352-021/29.05.98
Fax: +352-26.30.05.96
Home: +352-307.341
URL: http://BFrere.net
14 Sep
14 Sep
9:59 a.m.
Hello people,
I was having a small think about Signing/Crypting Mails.
To propagate the thought of protecting your privacy how much of a sense
would this scenario make:
My mum has an e-mail address and I want to make sure it's REALLY her and
when she mails me her super secret recipes that none else can read it.
Therefor I generate a PGP key for her but with no password or (if
possible) I store the passphrase in the password manager.
Advantage even if someone will intercept my message it is still crypted
and I know it's my mum!
As Patrick says it is important to keep in mind that PGP is based on
asymmetric cryptography and as such uses two keys. And that every
participants needs such a key.pair to communicate securely with each
other.
If it's a Single User PC wouldn't it make sense?
If it's multiuser and "basic" login password protection is present and
the right permissions are on the key wouldn't it make sense?
What would make sense to have no-passwd key ? If that is what you mean,
well I shall say that in any case the key is protected by a simply passwd
and either scenario is on a security level almost the same : not very
secure, but enough for your environnment I might say ;)
Thoughts?
This scheme sounds good for me, even it's not the state-of-the-art
security but at least there is encryption in the game which is miles
better then simple e-mail (our most unsecure communication mode ever, as
such I hope comes to you unmodified, cause I don't have my pgp keys at
hand here ;()
ciao,
pst
Cheers,
Steve Clement
Better living through Mum's Crypted Recipes!
--
ION Network Solutions
Steve Clement
Unix System Administrator
209, rue des Romains
L-8041 Bertrange
Tel: +352 261 276-2
Fax: +352 261 276-9
mailto:steve@ion.lu
http://www.ion.lu
_______________________________________________
Lilux-info mailing list
Lilux-info(a)lilux.lu
http://lilux.lu/mailman/listinfo/lilux-info
--
Pascal Steichen
pascal.steichen(a)lilux.lu
Lilux ASBL
http://www.lilux.lu
7201
days inactive
7205
days old
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Brent Frère -
Pascal.Steichen＠linux.lu -
Patrick Useldinger -
Steve Clement