Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Modern Alternatives to PGP

blog.gtank.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 261 posts

Re: Modern Alternatives to PGP

#221

Post by afiori »

kazinator wrote: post #169
yardstick wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if PGP was updated to remove the old cipher suites and only support modern ones like Curve25519 Poly1305 ChaCha20 etc? (At least for newly created keys/sigs/encrypted files) The aspect of PGP I like is the UI integration. At least when using GPG Tools. I can double click on an asymmetric encrypted file and GPG tools will decrypt it. Likewise my mail client can encrypt/decrypt/sign/verify emails automatically wit…

Then it will stop working for the users who have keys and data in those crypto-systems. They will have to use old, unmaintained versions of the software.

but then also the new systems would not work for them.

Re: Modern Alternatives to PGP

#222

Post by lixtra »

kingofhdds wrote: post #219
lotharrr wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(author of magic-wormhole here) To transfer a file, both parties do need to be online at the same time. The server (which I run) does not store the file's data: it stores tiny key-exchange messages until both sides manage to make a direct connection, but then the encrypted file data is sent from sender to recipient without being stored in the middle. So it doesn't replace email or an FTP server or some other asynchro…

Well, it's nice when phone is considered secure channel. It's not so for many serious applications, however. PGP invented to deal with situations when you communication channels are untrusted. See, no one says your software is bad, but when it is marketed as a better alternative to PGP it's not true, and worse, it's absolutely irresponsible thing to do.

According to parents nice talk[1] you can add a verify switch that lets you compare the signature of the actual key. So a public authenticated channel is enough.

[1] https://youtu.be/oFrTqQw0_3c

Re: Modern Alternatives to PGP

#223

Post by lixtra »

rakoo wrote: post #220
lotharrr wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(author of magic-wormhole here) To transfer a file, both parties do need to be online at the same time. The server (which I run) does not store the file's data: it stores tiny key-exchange messages until both sides manage to make a direct connection, but then the encrypted file data is sent from sender to recipient without being stored in the middle. So it doesn't replace email or an FTP server or some other asynchro…

Also, if you're sending an encryption key you have to make sure it's a good key, ie generate it from a reliable source of random and with a sufficient length, whereas magic wormhole's password is automatically generated for you.

PAKE takes care of that. Watch the parents nice talk: https://youtu.be/oFrTqQw0_3c

Re: Modern Alternatives to PGP

#224

Post by taeric »

afiori wrote: post #218
taeric wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you encrypted them, there is no reason to also sign them. Either you have the key to decrypt, thus you did it, or you don't, so you didn't. Signing is for verification of identity over potentially compromisable channels. Not securing controlled items.

if you encrypted it with a public key then you also need a signature, I am not sure what the parent meant though.

I'm not sure I follow. If you are decrypting with a key, either you trust it or you don't. It works or doesn't.

That is, why use a public key scheme, for private encryption? It is literally made to establish identity with someone else. Not yourself.

Even if you sign things for personal use, that is just to confirm nothing was tampered with. Which, if it was encrypted with a key, is already guaranteed. Otherwise it won't decrypt. Right?

Re: Modern Alternatives to PGP

#225

Post by Krasnol »

afiori wrote: post #213
Krasnol wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And here we go with the currently popular victim game which also brings the famous "censorship vs. moderation" trope and the "das wird man doch wohl noch sagen dürfen" classic. Please...this is ridiculous. Nobody falls for that besides the right wingers themselves. Nobody wants the right circle jerk in their comment section. The same way the right doesn't want any criticism of their behavior within their own bubble p…

both the left and the right are in a bubble. Generally speaking assume that between your in-group there are as many bad people as in your out-group. It is hard to make example that would not further polarize this thread, but I can promise you that the same intolerance and bubbles are present on both side of the political spectrum (for sure in the US, even if I live in Germany now I don't know much about this country.…

I don't complain about bubbles.

I brought the bubble up to demonstrate that the right is moderating all kinds of not fitting content where they are able to.

The big conspiracy the right wants to paint here based about moderation of their hate speech or pure insulting language is something that is being reinforced through their political figureheads and sold as censorship. I did not see anything like that on the other side (yet).

It's a disgusting and ridiculous play, especially in regard of real censorship which is really out there today.

Re: Modern Alternatives to PGP

#226

Post by e12e »

tptacek wrote: post #121
tyingq wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did mention "openssl enc" as well. Is there some other common bundled utility I missed? Or it's not useful to compare what's at hand? Not sure I'm getting the message behind the jab.

"openssl enc" requires you to select from over 105 different cipher constructions, virtually all of which are terribly insecure.

... And the secure constructs like aes gcm/aex are unavailable on the command line - only usable as library functions.

Re: Modern Alternatives to PGP

#227

Post by tptacek »

kingofhdds wrote: post #217
helper wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not hardcoded, its just the default server. You can specify your own via a cli flag.

Flag won't make it better. If user needs to run own server, it kills the only advantage in comparison with PGP - relative simplicity.

No, angry commenter, that is not the only advantage Magic Wormhole has over PGP.

Re: Modern Alternatives to PGP

#228

Post by tptacek »

kazinator wrote: post #171
tptacek wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it is better. You don't get sound cryptosystems from configurable, flexible things; flexibility is the mortal enemy of cryptographic soundness. That's how "this blogger" "not see" that this isn't better. This isn't some fringe belief among hipster cryptography engineers (among which I'm sure George counts himself). You can read it straight out of _Cryptography Engineering_.

Was this reasoning true 25 years ago? If so, why don't we go back to RSA over DES3, with MD5 digests? All that dizzying proliferation of new crypto is wrecking the soundness.

I don't understand your question. We don't use RSA because it's less secure than curves. We don't use 3DES because it's an insecure cipher with a 64 bit block size. We don't use MD5 because you can generate collisions for it.

The point of not using PGP is not being a system that can negotiate us down to things like 64-bit blocks or RSA.

Re: Modern Alternatives to PGP

#229

Post by tyingq »

xorcist wrote: post #215
DanBC wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your files won't be compromised. ...if you use it correctly. It appears that many people can't do this.

No, that's the point. For long term encrypted storage, GnuPG is one of few options and perfectly good best practice. Telling users that it's broken without pointing to a clear alternative is counter productive as they are likely to end up much worse. A more modern KDF would be welcome, but it is also important to communicate the benefit to an end user: You get comparable security with a shorter password. There are ot…

Interesting that the comment above is off-and-on turning grey.

It's pragmatic, informative, and highlights that bashing gpg for this specific use case, without naming something better...is arguably worse than saying nothing.

Why downvote it instead of just naming a better choice? What's the big secret?

Re: Modern Alternatives to PGP

#230

Post by tptacek »

tyingq wrote: post #229
xorcist wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's the point. For long term encrypted storage, GnuPG is one of few options and perfectly good best practice. Telling users that it's broken without pointing to a clear alternative is counter productive as they are likely to end up much worse. A more modern KDF would be welcome, but it is also important to communicate the benefit to an end user: You get comparable security with a shorter password. There are ot…

Interesting that the comment above is off-and-on turning grey. It's pragmatic, informative, and highlights that bashing gpg for this specific use case, without naming something better...is arguably worse than saying nothing. Why downvote it instead of just naming a better choice? What's the big secret?

I downvoted it for making the unhinged argument that a poor KDF is a feature because it encourages users to select better passwords.

I downvote lots of things. On Hacker News, we're explicitly encouraged to downvote disagreement, especially when verbalizing that disagreement will just clutter up the thread. Everyone gets downvoted. I've been downvoted all over this thread. You were just downvoted a minute ago.

The one thing we're not supposed to do is complain about downvoting. That's in the guidelines for the site.

Post reply on HN