[148797] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [Cryptography] What is a secure conversation? (Was: online
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jon Callas)
Sat Dec 28 11:38:50 2013
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
From: Jon Callas <jon@callas.org>
In-Reply-To: <52BDCCFA.6090405@iang.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2013 08:37:41 -0800
To: ianG <iang@iang.org>
Cc: Jerry Leichter <leichter@lrw.com>,
Cryptography Mailing List <cryptography@metzdowd.com>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>, Jon Callas <jon@callas.org>
Errors-To: cryptography-bounces+crypto.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@metzdowd.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Dec 27, 2013, at 10:54 AM, ianG <iang@iang.org> wrote:
> Hmmm... I have to think about this some more. If you don't see this message, stick your hand up.
Me, I didn't see it.
I should confess that I have moderator privs for the list, too, but barely have enough time to read it. I've also been a more sucky moderator, letting in things that are Perry's peeves and not mine more.
In the general problem, I think Ben Franklin's old maxim that three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead is apt. In general, you can't have a secure system that meets the properties of a mailing list or forum.
It's kinda like saying that you want a conversation that is secure only to the people within earshot, and as people go in and out of earshot, the security allows or denies them. You have to ask how "secure" is different from "within earshot."
Jon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Universal 3.2.0 (Build 1672)
Charset: us-ascii
wj8DBQFSvv5hsTedWZOD3gYRAndwAKCMVRTjbseqwbcuVl5Svq2g3Iaz1gCg2byw
XhyTqE/2wRr/JgpA2nVr3BI=
=qgjU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
