On Wed, 3 Jul 2002 14:28:44 +0200 (CET) Vadim Zeitlin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [I'm redirecting this to m-dev as it doesn't have much to do with using
> Mahogany -- yet :-)]
>
> On Tue, 2 Jul 2002 06:03:14 +0200 (Central Europe Daylight Time) Gerhard
> Häring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> GH> At least the following features:
>
> Thanks for your explanations, however I still have a few questions.
>
> GH> 1) Sending
> GH>
> GH> - Ability to choose a GPG id in the identity configuration page
> (same for
> GH> S/MIME).
>
> What constitutes a GPG/PGP/S/MIME identity? Should there be a way to
> create one and/or otherwise manage it?
i interpreted this to mean a key (GPG/PGP) or a certificate (S/MIME).
key/certificate management is one of the things where time needs to be
spent. newer M$ windows environments have certificate management, but
not key management, built in. OpenSSL offers some certificate management in
the traditional Un*x style (command line tools.) GPG offers command line
toos as well. these are all semi-standard in their environment, and i'd
come around to thinking that using these to the degree possible is best,
although there are still issues.
for example, i've only ever used OpenSSL cert management stuff as root
user. i will need to research whether there is a user level concept in
place for OpenSSL.
> GH> - Ability to select in a message composition dialog wether to
> encrypt,
> GH> sign, encrypt and sign or leave unencrypted the currently edited
> message.
> Does anyone see a good UI for this?
the only thing in my head right now is a security item that you can reach
with a right click on the message, that fans out into options.
i'd also allow for defaults attached to the pop3 & imap mailboxes. that
way, the user could have a different set of default behaviors for his/her
set of inboxes.
> Also, should we always encrypt/sign
> the entire message (including the attachments if any) or only the text
> parts of it? I.e., more precisely, are there any drawbacks in always
> encrypting everything? I'd prefer to do this as otherwis we'd need even
> more GUI controls to specify what is to be done.
i prefer not to answer this without doing some research into how folks are
actually using this.
> GH> - If you want to encrypt a message, get the public gpg key of all
> To/Cc/Bcc
> GH> addresses and encrypt the message with these public keys.
>
> What does it involve? Can we use the external program to do this?
i think we can use a GPG commandline interface here.
> GH> - After the Send button is pressed, ask for the passphrase if the
> message
> GH> is to be signed, then sign, encrypt, and send the message.
> We probably also need an option to remember the passphrase for the rest
> of
> the session, right?
as an option, i think. the more security minded will be horrified at saving
the passphrase for any length of time.
richard
--
Richard Welty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Averill Park Networking 518-573-7592
Unix, Linux, IP Network Engineering, Security
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
No, I will not fix your computer.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Mahogany-Developers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mahogany-developers
