Slashdot Mirror


Phil Zimmerman and PGP at CNN.com

rick_campbell writes "CNN is carrying an article about Phil Zimmerman and the fact that Network Associates is dropping support for the commercial version of Pretty Good Privacy. The article includes a little bit of Phil's take on the situation, a little history and some discussion of why this happened and what alternatives exist."

15 of 141 comments (clear)

  1. As someone who should know better, by cbensinger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I looked at PGP a while back and actually installed it. Unfortunately -- and perhaps because of my own carelessness -- it started causing issue(s) with my network connection and I ended up removing it. As the person responsible for the web/email servers where I work I know first hand how unsecure and public email is; yet I've not found a solution that I'm comfortable using. PGP seemed (at least to my knowledge) to be the most widespread, but even at that I couldn't name 3 people who I regularly exchange emails with who use it -- in fact I'm not sure if I could name anyone other than my wife who did. The only way I could ever see something like this widespread were if it were integrated into Outlook/Outlook Express/AOL/etc. and I don't see that happening. :(

  2. The End User Still Doesn't Care by Greyfox · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The biggest problem is the end user just doesn't care about E-mail security. You'd think with corporate privacy concerns and all that crap that they'd at least look into the technology.

    I was talking to a company about orders the other day and one of the ways you could place an order with them was to E-Mail them your credit card number. I told them I wasn't sending my credit card number over the open internet and asked if they had a PGP key I could encrypt to. They had no idea what I was talking about. After that I wasn't particularly willing to entrust my credit card number to them at all...

    The old US Crypto regulations did a pretty good job of stunting crpto-enabled mailers in the US, too. Since you couldn't export encryption or even an "Encryption enabling API" there wasn't a lot of integration work going on. Sure you could get a set of scripts to use PGP or GPG with Pine, Mutt or XEmacs, but most of the people using those mailers didn't even go to the effort. We won't even go into the happy fun GUI mailers that Joe Average User wants to use. PGP did do a good job of integrating into Outlook, at least.

    The upshot of all that is I think it'll be a long while before encrypted E-mail is the norm.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:The End User Still Doesn't Care by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      GPG integrates to Outlook, Slypheed(linux GTK email client that BLOWS AWAY KDE mail) and I believe there's even a pegasusmail plugin now.

      It makes signing and encrypting AND decrypting email pretty darn easy. If a user cant figure it out today they need to be beaten over the head with the keyboard... the HARDEST thing about GPG is creating your own private key.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:The End User Still Doesn't Care by no_l0gic · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "They had no idea what I was talking about. After that I wasn't particularly willing to entrust my credit card number to them at all..."

      I used to carry the same sentiment, complaining if a merchant provided no "secure" means of credit card information transfer.

      The problem is that although email may be a much less secure method of transfer than other commonly accepted means, the generally accepted methods are almost as insecure.

      e.g. - when you patronize the local drive through, realize you don't have enough cash on hand to cover your embarrassingly large order and are subsequently forced to pay with your credit card, do you know what goes on behind the window once you hand your card over? What number of pimply-faced purveyors of fast-food goodness are given the chance to jot down your card number, just as if they were to brows through the inbox of your unsecured merchant?

      Likewise, when you make a purchase at a store such as CompUSA, where they take an imprint of your credit card for their records - how do you know that the storage of the receipt is anything approaching secure; that they shred the receipt sufficiently after its use is fulfilled???

      While I agree that online merchants with decent security policies on buyer CC information may make me fell more secure, it is really only semantics... For all I know, the person receiving my encrypted CC info just decrypts it, jots it down on a sticky note, and sticks it on his monitor for anybody to see so that he remembers to complete my order in the morning. (Very unlikely, yes - but very possible as far as I can tell...)

    3. Re:The End User Still Doesn't Care by racerx509 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Thats pretty funny that you mention that, because I was a pimply-faced teenager working at an electronics store. I used to work at radio Shack and we took imprints of credit cards that gave ample oppurtunity to copy them. Well, we used to place ours in a large bucket that was handed to the manager at the end of the day. In the six months of my employ, we never had any dealings in credit card fraud. We were simply too busy to copy numbers down, but the idea did cross my mind a few times. We did have an incident involving fraud, but it was from an outside source.

      --
      13 year old white supremacists are shitty web designers.
  3. Tech support going the way of the dodo by Fastball · · Score: 4, Interesting
    A lot of vendors we deal with have significantly raised pricing for their support services, and a few others have quit supporting their software altogether. Struggling to stay in the black, a lot of companies are no longer developing and supporting software for the small shops and home office folks and are instead steering their efforts towards the big corporate money.

    To which I say fine. Alternatives for most of the stuff we use here, messaging systems, web based stuff, etc. can be found in open source projects or written in house. This is just another golden opportunity for open source software. Maybe my boss will hear my pleas now.

  4. Curiosity... by L-Wave · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Do many people truly use this technology? I understand many "geeks" use it, just for the cool factor, but I have yet to send email to someone who refuses to read/accept it because it was not PGP encrypted. I understand the use is for encrypting email and validating that it is, in fact, from the person who sent it...but really, does anyone use this for anything more than sending thier friends email that doesnt really need to be encrypted?

    --
    I SURVIVED THE GREAT SLASHDOT BLACKOUT OF 2002!
    1. Re:Curiosity... by thrillbert · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have yet to send email to someone who refuses to read/accept it because it was not PGP encrypted.

      Then you have never attempted to submit a vulnerability or links to fixed software to CERT.

      I believe their approach is "if we make it hard for them to email us, we won't have to work so hard!"

      ---
      I'm not an expert, but I play one at work.

  5. Here's where a monopoly can help... by gordgekko · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If Microsoft were serious about their "Trustworthy Computing" initiative, they'd buy PGP and integrate it into Outlook/Outlook Express and their Mac equivalents and make it mind numbingly easy to use. Within just a few years millions of people would be using PGP.

    Now who wouldn't celebrate something like that?

    --
    You want to know who isn't running Firefox 2.x? They spell it "definately" and "rediculous".
  6. Health Care Regulations and Encryption by stoolpigeon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    HIPPA is some legislation that has portions going into effect now and in the next few years. It requires those who handle medical information electronically to do so in a secure manner.

    I work for a collection agency and since we collect for hospitals sometimes we have been looking at this. We were going to use PGP as clients have specifically mentioned that they require it. Now I am not sure what we will do. Much of what is available out there has restrictions on being used for business.

    The movement towards being more secure information delivery seems slow but it is moving forward.

    I am just real interested in seeing what kind of alternatives surface for businesses like ours.

    .

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
  7. Largest Problem with Encryption ... by ProfMoriarty · · Score: 2, Interesting
    It's hard to use. Period.

    Until it gets simpler, easier, better integrated with email systems, it won't be widely accepted.

    Come out with a local system proxy that resides on the local machine, and have all email route through there. Have IT check to see if there is a public key for the email address, and let IT encrypt and forward onto the "real" email server. Have it handle simple text mail ... and voila ... you have a simple system that EVERY email system could use (POP3/IMAP servers in the proxy) ... and it would be simple, since regardless, it gets sent out encrypted.

    BTW, I came up with this system a couple of years ago ... company folded ... I wouldn't want to work on this again since I'm "tainted" ... but ideas are free ...

    --
    Karma? Karma? I don't need no stinkin' karma.
  8. Re:No privacy at all by blibbleblobble · · Score: 3, Interesting

    there still exist free s/w while do pretty decent job
    I've found GPG to be very difficult to use, even as someone who uses the command line a lot, I've neither got the Windows nor the Linux version to encrypt anything yet.

    they might not integrate into Outlook
    Does anyone know a decent Windows email client (i.e. not Pegasus or Outlook) which does handle PGP messages?

  9. Getting to encrypted email from here by iabervon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Encrypted email will probably go through essentially the same stages as HTTPS.

    First, it will get integrated into mail clients, for those users who insist on it, in a half-hearted way. Then mail clients will pop up a warning when you send something unencrypted, which most people will just click through for most messages, but people might notice when they're sending a message which they wouldn't send by plaintext HTTP. Then it will become normal for sites with HTTPS servers to have PGP keys for email. It probably won't get much beyond that any time soon, though.

    As far as implementation, I anticipate PGP and similar software dying out, in favor of PGP-like crypto functionality being supported in OpenSSL. Why OpenSSL? Because it has become the standard security library implementation. OpenSSH uses OpenSSL, even though SSH competes directly with telnet-over-SSL. OpenSSL also has all the cryptographic functions, it's BSD-licensed, and a lot of security-conscious projects beat on it. Once OpenSSL has support for PGP-formatted stuff, it will be easy for email clients to integrate it. Also, since many email clients are integrated with browsers, which need SSL support (and so use OpenSSL already), it's simply a matter of calling the decrypt function when you get an encrypted message, storing public keys in the address book, and encrypting messages to anyone who has a public key in the address book.

    It is no longer necessary to have a separate program for encryption. Writing crypto code is hard, but OpenSSL does or will do almost all of it, so you're left with managing the user's private keys (just like managing client certificates), managing other people's public keys (just like managing site certificates), and distributing the user's public key (just like business-card attachments). The only tricky thing is in signing other people's keys, but if you're not worried about active attacks with people who you don't talk to out-of-band and who don't aren't corporate sites, you don't need to bother.

  10. Inventor? by mc6809e · · Score: 2, Interesting


    "PGP inventor Phil Zimmermann says PGP.. "

    What about Rivest, Shamir, and Adleman? Some guy puts a wrapper around their invention and suddenly he's the inventor -- R,S, and A don't even get a mention.

    "Thanks for the technology...now get lost."

  11. Marketing encryption by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Disclaimer: IANIM (I am not in marketing)

    As I see it, there are two barriers to widespread adoption of PGP (or GnuPG). The first is usability; the second, more important one, is demand. People do not see the necessity of encryption, and in fact, many associate encryption with criminal activity.

    The first problem can be solved through the proper use of technology: create user-friendly interfaces for key generation, key management, etc. The goal should be to make PGP/GPG as easy to use as a word processor, spreadsheet, or video game.

    The second problem can be solved by promoting digital signatures as opposed to encrypted email. Most people don't care that their email is as open as a postcard. In addition, a significant chunk of the population associate encrypted email with organized crime and terrorism. These are the factors we have to work against in promoting encryption as a way to keep email private.

    Digital signatures are a different matter. There is no social prejudice against digital signatures per se, and the need for digital signatures is easy to demonstrate, as detailed below.

    Most people believe the From: headers on their emails without question. Unfortunately, it doesn't take much technical skill to fabricate an email with a fabricated From: header. (Below is a Python script that does just this). It's therefore trivial for a malicious person to send all kinds of forgeries to you, your friends, your co-workers, etc. The social damage can be catastrophic.

    Digital signatures solve this problem neatly: if you have any doubts about who actually sent the email, or the actual contents of the email, the digital signature gives you near mathematical certainty that the message and sender are authentic.

    In my experience, it only takes a couple of humorous demonstrations to get the point across to your intended audience; after which, they become motivated to learn and use PGP/GPG to sign and verify the signatures of emails. Using PGP/GPG for encryption is a logical next step.

    By the way, if you do try to demonstrate the forged From: header trick, please make absolutely sure that your audience is prepared ahead of time, and that you are legally authorized to do this, before you make your demonstration. Otherwise you could unnecessarily end up in a heap of trouble.

    It should be noted that PGP and GPG have an advantage in meeting the demand for digital signatures, since they're both relatively mature technologies. The danger is that the government could push hard for their own scheme, with built-in back doors and/or mandatory key-escrow. Selling secure, non-escrowed encryption is going to be much harder in the present political climate than it was before.

    Hope this helps.



    #!/usr/bin/python
    #NB: some of this code comes from _Python Standard
    #Library_ by Frank Lundh. Buy a copy!
    #
    # Please note: this is for demonstration purposes only. I utterly
    # condemn any use of this code for illegal purposes.
    #

    import smtplib
    import strings

    fakemail = string.join((
    "From: foo@bar.org",
    "To: bar@foo.org",
    "Subject: IMPORTANT",
    "X-FakeMail-Notice: This mail is FAKE!",
    "",
    "I like to pour hot grits down my pants. Thank you.",
    "",
    "This mail is FAKE!"), "\r\n")

    server = smtplib.SMTP("localhost")
    server.sendmail("foo@ba r.org", ["bar@foo.org"], fakemail)
    server.quit()