Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

PGP Universal - Usable Email Security?

Posted by simoniker on from the pretty-good-transparency? dept.

An anonymous reader writes "For years, noted cypherpunks such as Brad Templeton, Ian Goldberg (PDF link), Bram Cohen, and Len Sassaman (PDF link) have been calling for easy to use email encryption solutions which involve little crypto comprehension on the part of the user. Now, it seems like someone has listened: PGP Corporation has announced its PGP Universal, which says it 'shifts the burden of securing email messages and attachments from the desktop to the network in a way that is automatic and entirely transparent to users'." The Register has more information on these newly announced proxy servers.

18 of 225 comments (clear)

  1. Thus defeating the object? by Moth7 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    shifts the burden of securing email messages and attachments from the desktop to the network in a way that is automatic and entirely transparent to users'

    If you think that letting the powers that be implement our security by shifting the responsibility for encryption to them is going to make us take off our tin foil hats then you have another thing coming o.0 Methinx that if anything this will make me consider constructing a newer, stronger hat.

    1. Re:Thus defeating the object? by grub · · Score: 5, Insightful


      When you have dozens or hundreds of people to support, a server side implementation (if it works as advertised) is not a bad idea at all.

      Imagine trying to support people that still can't find the "any" key..

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    2. Re:Thus defeating the object? by Trigun · · Score: 5, Funny

      Imagine trying to support people that still can't find the "any" key..

      Just support them over a cliff for as long as your arm can hold out.

    3. Re:Thus defeating the object? by Frymaster · · Score: 5, Insightful
      a newer, stronger hat.

      size 7 1/2 please!

      however, if you have ever tried to get joe-average-desktop-user to set up gpg or pgp then you know that something has to be made easier! even the point-n-click solutions like winpt or mac-gpg (my fave!) make my dad's head ring. here's an example: i work with a guy who went to work for the nsa (that's right, super-spook central). about a year ago i asked him where his public key was so that i could send him some sensitive work-type stuff. his response? "i don't have any of that. it's too confusing". this is a guy who the nsa chose to hire!

      something has to be simplified if mom-n-pop (and nsa hires) are going to use crypto.

      (oh, and this is my public key)

      --

      2 1337 4 u!

    4. Re:Thus defeating the object? by jdludlow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's not really the point. For most users, even those who understand how and why to use PGP for their email, it's just too much of a hassle. This is aimed at companies that want their email secured, without having to trust the users to actually do it properly.

      You can still add on your own encryption outside of this system if you are extra paranoid.

    5. Re:Thus defeating the object? by RabidOverYou · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ah, that's what they want you to think. It's those who say they work for the NSA, such that you think they must not work for the NSA, that really do work for the NSA. It's those who don't that don't. Or do. Don't. Wait.

  2. Can't...resist....blatant.....plug... by ALecs · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This looks a lot like what the company I work for does.
    (A box/infrastructure) that does the crypto/key management for you)

  3. why bother? by c4ffeine · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If someone really needs to use PGP security, which is almost unbreakable, they would figure out how to use existing programs. Most potential customers for this program have no need for it; the vast majority of people would be fine with little or no encryption. Really, though, who sends their credit card numbers over email? If it's that important, people go to the trouble to figure it out. So, in my view, this is a luxury. People who have a real need for PGP will take the 5 minutes to figure it out. Other people simply don't need the security.

    --
    "73% of quotes on the Internet are made up" -Ben Franklin
    1. Re:why bother? by Maradine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's mostly correct. However, there are many organiztions that are now subject to various legislation (such as HIPAA or GLBA) that didn't *know* they need this until recently.

      Consumer information safeguards are mandated in many industries now. This package would be a less painful, more expensive way to meet those requirements.

      Of course, I haven't seen it yet. It could be crap. Who knows? I registered for the whitepaper, we'll see.

      --

      trustedworlds.net - gaming, security, and the gunk that lives in between

  4. Not completely useless, but you still need trust.. by cmowire · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My first thought is, "Oh great, that'll just mean you need to trust the server."

    But then I started to consider what would happen if a lot of the large domain servers were to start signing their mail automatically with a "Yes this really did go through our mail server" signature.

    For one, if every message to come from Yahoo was signed with yahoo's key, you could automatically deny every message from yahoo that didn't have that signature. Think of how much easier spam catching would be.

    Joe-jobbing could be reduced. If it comes from Intergalactic Orange Smoothie's DNS address without a signature, you know that somebody's been joe-jobbing Intergalactic Orange Smoothie.

    And encryption between known partners could be enforced. So every message between Intergalactic Orange Smoothie and their partners could be encrypted.

    Problems are, not everybody's got PGP. So Intergalactic Orange Smoothie can't make every message encrypted. So there still needs to be some user-interaction.

    --
    Gentoo Sucks
  5. Shouldn't keyfob USB help here instead? by Uncle+Op · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Key management - and paranoia management - remain the problems with all PGP/GPG solutions. If it's too easy to use, it's usually not secure enough and vice versa.

    It seems that a device - like the keyfob-sized USB "memory drives" should be nearly enough for any personal use. Ideally there would be some sort of fingerprint or biometric reader in it too, though the existing passphrase mechanism could suffice. Just put your secret key on it and you can take it with you. I guess the problem is keeping randome machines from snagging a copy, though, since the same machine you plug the fob in to can also snag your keystrokes and thus your passphrase.

    If it's not one thing, it's another.

  6. Re:Thing is... by grub · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Assume the encrypting mail server is internal and you use a switched LAN (that helps prevent sniffing). I think the big sell here is to tell the customers that your mail will not leave your company unencrypted onto the Big Evil Internet.

    Also you miss the point when you say "access your sensitive data without your permission". If this is in a company, your employer owns the computers, network and ultimately the "sensitive data", not you.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  7. If the burden transfers... by wmaker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The article states that the network is then responsible for decrypting and encrypting... it has to be clear text someplace on the network to begin with then. Doesn't that defeat the purpose? And, why is this necessary when the future 'ipv6' to be done by 2007 will be completely encrypted anyway (internet version 2 if you will).

    --

    What is slashdot?
  8. Similar solutions have been around for a while... by Not_Wiggins · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The ability to plug-in PGP has been a part of several mail clients for a while... mutt, pine, etc. But, this has been the domain of the "more than casual" user... I would dread explaining to Mom how to setup her private/public keys, let alone why she should use encryption and the dreaded "how does this work" discussion.

    There's quite a bit of difficulty, methinks, in adopting this technology at any level the average user is aware of. I mean, the only way I can see wide-spread adoption happening successfully is you don't even let the users know how their mail is being encrypted/decrypted. Otherwise, you leave it open to too much user error: the dreaded "I lost my keys," or "Bob-IT-Guy, can you decrypt this important mail sitting in Sally's inbox... she's on vacation and we need it now!"

    You take the (oh... forgive me) Lotus Notes approach (I'm *not* a fan, but I understand this aspect of the software): it can be setup so the encrypt and decrypt happens transparently to the user between Lotus Notes servers. If you had something along this level between mail servers, then you might start getting into secure transmission of e-mail.

    Man... there are so many areas to lock-down... while I'm a big fan of PGP, it seems like the whole nature of the e-mail communication system needs to be looked at and (potentially) overhauled. So what if the message is transmitted securely between me sending it and you receiving it? If you do it at a user level, then you need universal support built into all the different mail reader applications. If you do it at the server level, then you need to lock-down the security more tightly at the server level (can your admins read your mail? Sure can! Not that it isn't already that open today). And how are keys managed? And who do you trust? And who manages how public keys get distributed?

    Right now, it is all fairly manual (unless the tools have been updated since I last looked at them).

    I can hear it now... can... opening... worms... everywhere! ;)

    --
    Diplomacy is the art of saying, "Nice doggie!" until you can find a rock.
  9. Re:Thing is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is a Client Key Mode that doesn't store the Private key on the PGP server. In this mode the admin can't view your key. Read through all the FAQ's.

  10. GNU Anubis by miah · · Score: 5, Informative

    Doesn't Anubis do this already? Why would anybody implement something like this, when a free alternative exists.

    http://www.gnu.org/software/anubis/

    Not to mention it has many more features than this, and no NSA Backdoors =)

    --
    -miah
  11. Great for Spammers by hysma · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This would be a great way for spammers to send their junk and bypass any server-side spam filters.

    The spam can't be scanned while in PGP form, and according to their diagram it won't be decrypted until AFTER hitting the mail server.

    I suppose one point up for security, one point down for preventing spam :(

  12. Text scrambler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Personally, I'm just going to use jwz's new script for all my communications:

    Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe."

    http://jwz.livejournal.com/256229.html