IETF OpenPGP WG reopened
David Leon Gil
coruus at gmail.com
Mon Mar 16 14:52:00 PDT 2015
On Saturday, March 14, 2015, stef <s at ctrlc.hu> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 05:23:16AM +0000, David Leon Gil wrote:
> > Like it being incompetently designed?
> depends what the intended goal of said software is:
> 1/ winning a battle in the 1st cryptowars to make crypto exportable? i
> it brilliantly succeeded at this design goal.
> 2/ making cryptograms stand out as strong selectors thanks to all this
> plaintext metadata in the openpgp packet as defined per rfc4880. again, a
> smashing success.
> maybe if your usecase is not covered by the above two, maybe you should be
> looking for another solution. people-with-hammers ;)
Fortunately, my goals do not include either of those. :) And I think my
comment was somewhat unfair: The original OpenPGP standard was well thought
out (but ultimately insecure). It just became a horrifying with three more
As this is cypherpunks: I wish more folks were working on making
steganography for encrypted mail more practical. It seems, for example,
entirely feasible, to encode encrypted mail as (nonsense but
grammatical) sentences in the user's language. I would be happy to deploy
a proposal that accomplished something like this with < ~25% overhead,
which seems doable, but hard.
(This is something that will be essential for users in countries like
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 1625 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the cypherpunks