Ah, I just realised I am a bit confused about matters, so I need to refresh
my memory and I will be doing so this weekend.

But more to the point, if you are focusing on S/MIME then I will have a
look at the GPG end of things. So we could coordinate our efforts,
allthough in the beginning mine will less focused as I have other efforts
to maintain with M at the moment.

Please let me know how you will proceed. Any pointers to documents of
joint interrest will be appreciated.

Regards

Thomas


On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 21:17:47 -0400 (EDT) Richard Welty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 23:17:36 +0200 (CEST) Thomas Finneid
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Are you just looking at S/MIME or GPG aswell?
> 
> my focus is on S/MIME, but much of the underlying crypto infrastructure
> is
> likely to be the same, so i certainly target a "proper" object oriented
> design which would permit reusability where appropriate.
> 
> > The reason I am asking is
> > that if we consider GPG as well, the design could perhaps be a more
> > generic
> > encryption module design so that implementations and algorithms can
> > easily
> > be substituted.
> 
> well, since OpenSSL is already out there, and already incorporated in
> Mahogany for pop over ssl and imap over ssl, i was inclined to leverage
> off
> of all the fine work that has already been done there. furthermore, when
> and if new crypto gets incorporated into OpenSSL, we get that for minimal
> effort.
> 
> > A word of caution though (I am sorry for the harsh wording herein, but
> I
> > normally don�t compromise when it comes to security. That said, I have
> > neither any real understanding of GPG or S/MIME, except for superficial
> > theory and practice) 
>  
> > Please keep in mind that the concepts needs to be understood fully,
> > without
> > exceptions, and that an implementation needs to undergo severe testing
> > and
> > verification, before it is usable. If the implementations design is
> > flawed,
> > then it is just as good as no encryption.
> 
> i have some security background myself, and am disinclined to cut
> corners.
> i even tend to have negative feelings about smtp over tls (although i use
> it), because i think it confuses people about the difference between the
> weak security of smtp over tls vs good end-to-end security that can be
> had 
> rom gpg/pgp and S/MIME when properly implemented and administered.
> 
> i also think that the designers of pgp/gpg and S/MIME are smart people
> and
> that their basic designs are pretty sound. we need to implement what they
> intended, carefully and thoroughly.
> 
> 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
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf


-- 
Thomas Finneid

email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




-------------------------------------------------------
Sponsored by:
ThinkGeek at http://www.ThinkGeek.com/
_______________________________________________
Mahogany-Users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mahogany-users

Reply via email to