Re: A brief comparison of email encryption protocols
Eric Murray wrote: | Adam Shostack writes: | > | > Leaving it out may be ok because we can define a standard location by | > key type: | > | > key://slack.lne.com/~ericm/key.asc | > key://slack.lne.com/~ericm/key.x509 | > | > key://slack.lne.com/~ericm/x509/key.cert | > key://slack.lne.com/~ericm/pgp/key.asc | > | > I have no objection to defining a shorter URL, but would want some | > indicator that we're in user space, not host/domain/realm space. A | > ~username serves that purpose as well as /u/ and is a more common | > usage. | | Ok. Sounds good, for user-maintained keys like PGP anyhow. | More hierarchical keys, like X.509, could be maintained | by a CA that also maintains the server... some people who | could use encryption don't know, and don't want to know, enough | about it to even be willing to hold their own certificates. They | want it to "just work". I think that this scheme should be flexable | enough to be able to support a CA maintaining user's certificates | for them. Note that this doesn't mean that the CA/key server | would know the keys, i.e. this should not support GAK*. Having keys placed in a namespace defiend by a user does not mean the user needs to make the key available, only that the key can be found there. Nothing says we can't have key://keys.verisign.com/~ericm if they issue keys in some space that maps into user names. | > My last comment is that if we define a URN scheme for keys, we should | > force a dependable structure on it, so that its predictable where to | > find a users PGP key from an email address, without having to check 6 | > locations. Nothing is there now, we should require order to make | > everyones life easier. | | Along those lines, I was envisioning adding a KEY RR type to | DNS, and using it to maintain pointers to keyservers. [...] | This sounds so obvious that I'm sure that I'm not the first | or even the tenth person to think of it, and in fact I | see a KEY RR type defined in the BIND 4.9.3BETA17 source. But | there's just a type there, nothing else to support it. | Anyone know what it's for? Donald Eastlake is writing the spec for storing keys in nameservers. Its in the process of moving to draft standard; there will probably be something about it after LA. I think its: ftp://ds.internic.net/draft-ietf-dnssec-secext-09.txt Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume
participants (1)
-
Adam Shostack