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

The PGP Problem

latacora.micro.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 369 posts

Re: The PGP Problem

#121

Post by Avamander »

fouc wrote: post #120
jeroenhd wrote: post #82

Whent talking about alternatives, Signal and WhatsApp get mentioned because they're easy to use. They are. Signal is pretty secure. WhatsApp probably is as well but we can't be sure. That is, until it isn't anymore. WhatsApp already has a key extraction protocol built right in for its Web interface. Signal has a web (Electron) interface as well, and a shitty one at that, where the messages also get decrypted. For Wha…

I'm a little confused as to why you mention Signal and WhatsApp but not Telegram?

Telegram invented it's own crypto, without an audit it's untrustworthy. There's only Signal and Keybase that has been audited, so Whatsapp should be excluded from the list of trustworthy IM apps as well.

Re: The PGP Problem

#122

Post by Avamander »

elagost wrote: post #9

With the rapid churn of various chat clients it's hard to get something to stick, and I attempted to settle on XMPP+OMEMO (or OTR), since it's a protocol, not an "app" (eww). Not a single person I know still uses XMPP, and it's easier to just tell people "Download Signal". However, that requires a phone number, and is useless on a desktop if your phone's off. Despite being Free Software, it's fairly locked down. Secu…

Why not Keybase as secure messaging? It's easy to get people to use it and it provides much more than just XMPP+OMEMO.

Re: The PGP Problem

#123

Post by kokx »

fouc wrote: post #120
jeroenhd wrote: post #82

Whent talking about alternatives, Signal and WhatsApp get mentioned because they're easy to use. They are. Signal is pretty secure. WhatsApp probably is as well but we can't be sure. That is, until it isn't anymore. WhatsApp already has a key extraction protocol built right in for its Web interface. Signal has a web (Electron) interface as well, and a shitty one at that, where the messages also get decrypted. For Wha…

I'm a little confused as to why you mention Signal and WhatsApp but not Telegram?

Most cryptographers do not see Telegram as a secure encrypted protocol. This is for two reasons: the first one is that Telegram doesn't do end-to-end encryption by default (and if you enable it, functionality is limited). And secondly, they roll their own cryptographic protocol.

Re: The PGP Problem

#124

Post by PeterisP »

floatingatoll wrote: post #77
Sniffnoy wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? I mean, that's what publicly listing your public key is for, right?

Nope. I have at least three public never-expiring keys that I am unable revoke and that remain listed as valid because the keyservers don’t occasionally revalidate proof of ability to decrypt.

Well, the keyservers also don't validate if it's your key instead of a key submitted by me with your email address on it, so for any secure messaging you need some other, authenticated channel for the potential recipient to assert which is their key.

Re: The PGP Problem

#125

Post by PeterisP »

cyphar wrote: post #65
stubish wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We encrypt files: - For offsite backups (disaster recovery), mirroring object stores and filesystems to cheap cloud storage. - For encrypting secrets needed for maintaining IT systems (eg. all those shared passwords we never seem to be able to get rid of) - For encrypting sensitive documentation for transfer (email attachment, shared via filesystem, shared via HTTP, shared via pastebin even) Despite the awful UI, Gnu…

> I think all use cases boil down to 'encrypt and/or sign a file' for one of the stages. In the article, 'talking to people', 'sending files', 'encrypting backups' are all really just 'encrypt/sign a file' followed by transmission. But they aren't the same thing. That's the whole point the article is making. Yes, if all you have is a tool that does "encrypt+sign a file", then all crypto problems will look like "encry…

For securely talking to people, often you may want non-repudiation, which is the exact opposite of deniability and anonymity.

There are very different, incompatible needs for slightly different usecases.

Re: The PGP Problem

#126

Post by belorn »

lvh wrote: post #41
Sniffnoy wrote: post #38

So what do I use for encrypted messaging that can, like, replace email, then? Nobody seems to have provided any sort of satisfactory answer to this question. To be clear, an answer this has to not just be a secure way of sending messages, it also has to replicate the social affordances of email. E.g., things distinguishing how email is used from how text-messaging is used: 1. Email is potentially long-form. I sit dow…

Do you feel like PGP is a good way to cold email people in practice? (I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but that sounds like what you're saying.)

Trust on first use is not an uncommon security practice. Imperfect but in many times the best alternative, and a good solution while we wait for a replacement to gain traction.

Re: The PGP Problem

#128

Post by floatingatoll »

Sniffnoy wrote: post #109
floatingatoll wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. I have at least three public never-expiring keys that I am unable revoke and that remain listed as valid because the keyservers don’t occasionally revalidate proof of ability to decrypt.

Oh, that's a good point. Heh, I have one of those, too, which even caused a problem once[0]. I wouldn't expect people to find it first, though, because I wouldn't expect people to go to a keyserver first; I'd expect them to find my key on one of the places I have it listed on the web. I've never tried blindly entering someone's email address into a keyserver and just hoping they have a key; I've only sent PGP-encrypt…

GPG chooses the key to use based on alphanumeric ordering of the short key ID, last time I experimented anyways. Best of luck overcoming that!

Re: The PGP Problem

#129

Post by toxik »

floatingatoll wrote: post #102
olliej wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iMessage doesn't have any kind of auto deleted messages - it's a feature that messages are persistent across all your devices.

Incorrect. Audio messages are deleted two minutes after playback by default.

Which is a receiver-side setting and can be set to one year. Your point is moot.

Re: The PGP Problem

#130

Post by svckr »

jeroenhd wrote: post #82

Whent talking about alternatives, Signal and WhatsApp get mentioned because they're easy to use. They are. Signal is pretty secure. WhatsApp probably is as well but we can't be sure. That is, until it isn't anymore. WhatsApp already has a key extraction protocol built right in for its Web interface. Signal has a web (Electron) interface as well, and a shitty one at that, where the messages also get decrypted. For Wha…

> But all alternatives seem to focus on either signing OR encrypting OR the latest secure messaging app instead of a PGP replacement.

OP mentions exactly this point in the "The Answers" (https://latacora.micro.blog/2019/07/16/the-pgp-problem.html#...) section.

Post reply on HN