pem-dev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: A brief comparison of email encryption protocols

1996-02-20 19:26:00

Harald:

In fact, MOSS is too flexible.  In most circumstances, signatures should be 
performed before encryption.  MOSS allows people to sign ciphertext, by 
putting a multipart/encrypted inside a multipart/signed.  The MOSS 
specification offers no warnings about this "feature."

Russ, could you give your reasoning for saying that this is a bug, not a 
feature? I could imagine some (weird) scenarios where I'd want to sign 
ciphertext, for instance if I wanted to sign to the fact that I'd passed 
on someone else's encrypted messages.  Look at the comp.os.linux.announce 
newsgroup for a case where one person is PGP-signing messages that someone 
else sent - people will use this stuff in ways I can't even imagine.  That 
said, an applicability statement for MOSS, saying what is or is not a good 
idea, might be a Good Thing.

I wonder why you would want to sign ciphertext generated by someone else?  
This is especially "weird" if you do not have the key to decrypt the message.

Yes, I think that a statement saying that signature should be applied before
encryption is a very good idea.

Russ


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>