Slashdot Mirror


PGP & GPG

Ben Rothke writes "PGP (Pretty Good Privacy), as most Slashdot readers know, is one of the most popular software encryption programs ever. It is so good and so effective that in the early 1990s the FBI launched a multi-year investigation against Phil Zimmerman, the creator of PGP, for possible violation of federal export laws, especially ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulation). After many years of investigation, the FBI ultimately dropped its case against Zimmerman. Even though PGP is synonymous with end-user encryption, there have only been a few books written on the subject. Jump to 2006, and PGP & GPG: Email for the Practical Paranoid is a welcome title." Read the rest of Ben's review. PGP & GPG: Email for the Practical Paranoid author Michael Lucas pages 216 publisher No Starch Press rating 8 reviewer Ben Rothke ISBN 1593270712 summary Pretty good overview of PGP & GPG

On page 167 in Appendix A of the book, the author candidly writes that PGP "comes with a very good and complete manual at over 300 pages". With that, one may question why one would spend $24.95 on a book which covers much of the same information as the bundled documentation.

The reality is that there is a large class of people that will simply not read any form of documentation. Rather, they prefer something with an ISBN number. Such people are a boon to authors (of which I am one) and publishers. For that group, PGP & GPG: Email for the Practical Paranoid provides a pretty good overview of how to use PGP.

The book is written for an end-user who, while comfortable with the workings of technology, is new to the sometimes strange world of public key cryptography. The author writes in an easy-to-read style and, through repetition, inculcates the principal ideas of encryption and cryptography to the reader.

The introduction and first chapter provide a good presentation of the concepts of encryption, cryptography and public-key cryptography. The idea of public-key cryptography, on which PGP is based, is not so intuitive, and many people struggle with the basic concepts. The first chapter, appropriately titled 'Cryptography Kindergarten' is a good read for those who are public-key cryptography challenged.

On a side note, the notion that even smart end-users can be intimidated by public key cryptography was detailed in a now seminal research paper 'Why Johnny Can't Encrypt: A Usability Evaluation of PGP 5.0.'

The premise of the paper is that user errors cause or contribute to most computer security failures, yet user interfaces for security still tend to be clumsy, confusing, or near-nonexistent. The authors argue that effective security requires a different usability standard, and that it will not be achieved through the user interface design techniques appropriate to other types of consumer software. The authors conclude that PGP 5.0 is not usable enough to provide effective security for most computer users despite its attractive graphical user interface. Even though PGP is in version 9.x, it still suffers from usability flaws.

Cryptography purists may recoil when the author repeatedly uses the term 'military-grade encryption.' Military-grade encryption and military-grade cryptography are overused terms, most often by marketing departments, but there is no real definition of 'military-grade encryption' -- and even if there were, it would be classified. Most people use 'military-grade encryption' to mean really strong crypto, much like those who use the term 'Olympic-size swimming pool' to refer to a really large pool. But the term 'military-grade encryption' is so misused by so many people that it is a lost cause to try to fight it.

In the rest of the book, chapters 2 - 11, the author details the varied usages of PGP & GPG. The book also details the differences between OpenPGP, PGP and GPG.
The difference between them is that PGP is a commercial piece of software, GPG (Gnu Privacy Guard) is open source, and OpenPGP is a protocol that defines a standard format for encrypted messages, signatures, and certificates for exchanging public keys.

The author astutely writes that while PGP provides really strong security, this is only if, and this is a huge if, it is implemented correctly. Chapter 11 notes that although OpenPGP provides a reliable method of authentication and encryption, it is also not unbreakable. OpenPGP can be vulnerable to many different types of attacks and weaknesses, including poor implementation, hardware or software compromise, fake keys and more. It is important to realize that OpenPGP provides significant, but not unbreakable security.

At 180 pages and priced at $24.95, PGP & GPG: Email for the Practical Paranoid is an excellent book that shows the end-user in an easy to read and often entertaining style just about everything they need to know to effectively and properly use PGP and OpenPGP.

For those that want to save money and perhaps save a few trees, the free documentation that comes along with the product is similarly worth reading.

You can purchase PGP & GPG: Email for the Practical Paranoid from bn.com.

Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

12 of 157 comments (clear)

  1. Should rename the book by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Interesting

    PGP & GPG: Email for the Practical Paranoid

    title soon to become "PGP & GPG: encryption for the practical suspicious target of the homeland security dept."

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  2. Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    "On page 167 in Appendix A of the book, the author candidly writes that PGP "comes with a very good and complete manual at over 300 pages". With that, one may question why one would spend $24.95 on a book which covers much of the same information as the bundled documentation.

    The reality is that there is a large class of people that will simply not read any form of documentation. Rather, they prefer something with an ISBN number. Such people are a boon to authors (of which I am one) and publishers. For that group, PGP & GPG: Email for the Practical Paranoid provides a pretty good overview of how to use PGP."

    Okay, I stopped reading there. Basically you're saying "hey, you could look this stuff up, but if you're in the habit of spending money on information that is freely available in order to support a generally obsolete and overpriced/monopolized way of communication, go for it." Mind you I'm not railing against all authors/publishers, but technical manuals need some distinguishing reason other than "hey, it has an ISBN."

  3. Pretty Poor Privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I can't say I ever found any PGP product good for any application. It was way too complicated and just not what was needed.

    Instead, I found my holy grail of encryption in Truecrypt (http://truecrypt.org )which simply has rocked for the longest time (I'm in no way associated with it). Its free, and as far as I'm concerned as far as free encryption tools go, nothing can touch it, esp if you use one of the double pass encyption methods down the list, and don't label your volumes as truecrypt volumes or keep the encrytion program and the encrypted data on the same harddrive (use a USB key). No way they can identify what it is if you leave no clues.

    Unfortunatly, I found out today on Wikipedia that Truecrypt has a rather lest than sparkling history... it seems rather sordid actually from what its homepage would allude to....

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truecrypt

    PGP's probelm was it was never really integrated into an email system, and it had that totally messy key system that really was not worth bothering with or learning unless you were a highly trained memeber of secret police agency (as opposed to John Q public). There definatly is a begging need for good encryption of plain text ascii emails, but PGP just doesn't step up to the job. It needs to be integrated end to end in sendmail or whatever other mail transport servers, and inside the big heavyweight email programs used out there... PINE, Netscape Mail, the webmail services, and perhaps even OUtlook.

    Skip Truecrypt, encrypt your data in a small volume and attach it as a file to who you want to send it to... in fact, encrypt whole harddrives or create files that can be mounted as virtual harddrives.

    Truecrypt: http://truecrypt.org/

    Zimmerman is more of a posterboy against the man than really than anything else in my practical opinion. I don't know any compgeek that uses PGP, or anyone that uses it to encrypt their mail.

  4. Misdirected criticism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The failure of secure email to proliferate has nothing to do with PGP's usability issues. 99% of email users already have S/MIME integrated into their mail readers as a standard feature - very usable and secure, yet almost universally unused. It's not about the user interface, it's about perceived need (or lack thereof).

  5. S/MIME by Lord+Ender · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When people say "X.509" when talking about email security, what they mean is S/MIME. It is pretty clear S/MIME is going to win the battle to be the most common form of email security on the Internet. It has built-in support on Outlook, Thunderbird, hell--even mutt.

    If people CHOOSE to trust a PKI, S/MIME works WAY better than PGP because key distribution is much easier. If they don't want to do a PKI, they can still trust individual certificates, just like PGP. They can verify certificates by reading thumbprints over the phone, if they like.

    Basically, S/MIME can do everything PGP/MIME can do except the "web of trust." And WoT is just WAY too much work for 99.9% of the population. PGP will eventually vanish.

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  6. Re:So What Does It Mean? by sahuaro · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Mod this poster up! The inventors of public key encryption envisioned a future where encrypting email would be as common as stuffing a letter in an envelope. Phishing would be unheard of since a digital signature would prove that the mail came from who it said it did.

    The US government, of course, didn't want this future to come about and put roadblocks in place to prevent it. So, today we have phoney email scams and unencrypted personnel data that gets scattered to the winds on unsecured government and private sector computers. Encrypt your email? Why you must be doing something illegal!

    Dennisk

    --
    Phoenix Linux Users Group
    Penguins in the desert
  7. Re:I wish security were more accessible to the mas by smoker2 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Add to that the number of web sites using an aging perl shopping cart system whereby half the credit card number is immediately emailed to the admin and the rest is stored as plain text on the server. Also the web sites who claim that your numbers are perfectly safe as they are using 128 bit encryption and the data is not decrypted until it reaches their [colocated, probably virtual] server. I had an argument with some previous employers when they insisted on calling their colocated RAQ3 a "secure server". I pointed out that they had never even seen the facility that it was housed in, and the private data was freely accessable using telnet, because it wasn't encrypted once ssl had done with it.

    Just as a an example, I set up a shopping cart of the type I mentioned and they thought it was the mutts nutz until I showed them that I was receiving both parts of the credit card numbers by email at a private email account. Even then I don't think they thought it was a problem. I left shortly afterwards.

    I wonder whose harvesting those numbers now...

    BTW, I deleted that shopping cart, so I am not guilty of abusing the system. It was done to prove a point.

  8. Re:I wish security were more.. by hyfe · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Any snooping done is most likely going to be automatic, and this ensures naive snooping won't work. As long as this is not in widespread use it's going to much more secure than not doing it, and it's relativly easy to do and non-obstrusive.

    All-in-all, I think it's a practical down-to-earth simple solution. Seriously, don't laugh just because it's not technical enough for you.. So while you're busy being a tech-snon, the world will be busy getting stuff done. This works; for now.

    --
    "" How about taking the safety labels off everything, and let the stupidity-problem solve itself? """
  9. Re:A New Core Class in College? by kwerle · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This is currently modded funny, but I'm not sure why.

    So basically 99.9% of users online today.

    You're missing at least one 9, I figure. If there are a billion folks [more or less] online...
    1,000,000,000; 1 in 1000 would mean that 1,000,000 people online have more than a notion of how public-key cryptography works.

    I guess I could believe that there are 10K or more, but I certainly think there are fewer than 100K.

  10. Getting Started with PGP and GPG by klenwell · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Uncanny timing on this article for me -- I just this morning set up both PGP and GPG clients on my Windows machine. I found some inspiration in this tutorial on PGP:

    http://www.haltabuse.org/pgp/win/index.shtml

    The tutorial talks about version 7 or 8 of the software when it was still freeware. Version 9 it appears still offers the basic functionality for free, but I have to admit that I was a bit put off by the fact that it's presented as a 30 day trial with a EULA that includes passages like this:

    You hereby expressly consent to PGP Corp's processing of personal data you provide to PGP Corp (which may be collected by PGP Corp or its distributors) according to PGP Corp's current privacy policy which is incorporated into this Agreement by reference (see ). If "you" are an organization, you will ensure that each member of your organization (including employees and contractors) about whom personal data may be provided to PGP Corp has given his or her express consent to PGP Corp's processing of such personal data. Personal data will be processed by PGP Corp or its distributors in the country where it was collected, or in the location of PGP Corp or its distributors; United States laws regarding processing of personal data may be less stringent than the laws in your jurisdiction.

    Standard EULA boilerplate perhaps, but I found it unnerving in a product that's supposed to protect your privacy.

    I also downloaded GPG4Win from

    http://www.gpg4win.org/

    and got it running. I just succeeded in encrypting a message with the one and decrypting it with the other, so I think I'll go with GPG.

    Amazing that such tools aren't de rigueur by now.

    --
    Innovation makes enemies of all those who prospered under the old regime... -- Machiavelli
  11. Don't put too much trust in certs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    PGP will eventually vanish.

    Don't put too much trusts in certs. For example, you can ssl in the middle, so in theory smime in the middle should be possible. I actually figured out in one case ssl in the middle only works transparently when a valid CA root cert existed. A self signed cert gave it up that my ssl traffic was being intercepted when the popup informed me the host didn't match where I was going. If you don't believe this look as the Bluecoat proxy servers. One hotel I stayed in did this, so I VPNed using ipsec to home to do my banking.

    PGP, I prefer the GNU version as the source is visible, veted and verified not to have back doors. And I can check for myself. PGP allows me to trust you without the need for a 3rd party trust. Do you trust all the root and trusted CAs in IE? I sure don't.

    Calling for PGP to "vanish" is quite premature.

  12. PGP is used in secure file transfer; SMIME revenge by jonathan_lampe · · Score: 2, Interesting
    "I can't say I ever found any PGP product good for any application. It was way too complicated and just not what was needed."

    PGP is big in the secure file transfer worlds of banking, insurance and the like. It's quite common to "PGP" a file and then send it via FTP or SSH.

    Someone else mentioned S/MIME encryption. I have two things to say about that:

    #1: An analogy: PGP is to S/MIME as SSH is to SSL. The first technologies are designed for individuals to each trust each other; the latter technologies are designed to rely on a trusted third party (specifically, a CA).

    #2: Despite not-wide-use in email, S/MIME is having its revenge in the form of the AS/x protocols, most commonly AS/2. This protocol is widely used in retail, distribution and pharmas and uses S/MIME encryption to both send files and receive cryptographically secure receipts. (Drop me a line at jonathan.lampe@standardnetworks.com if you want to chat about this further; I'm looking for some beta testers for a related application!)