Thank you for that in depth explanation - this is something I wasn't
aware of, and it's good to know!
On Sun, 15 Nov 2015, David Champion wrote:

> * On 15 Nov 2015, Rejo Zenger wrote: 
> > ++ 14/11/15 22:47 -0500 - Xu Wang:
> > >>
> > >> A copy of the message will also be encrypted by your own public key and 
> > >> saved
> > >> in the folder you have specified for Sent messages.  It is this copy 
> > >> which you
> > >> can decrypt with your private key later on, if you wish to read what you 
> > >> sent
> > >> to the recipient.
> > [...]
> > >I see. So it is one email, but there is never actual double encryption
> > >on the same text. It is two single encryptions. I think I am
> > >understanding more.
> > 
> > As I understand it: your message is encrypted to a session key, and that 
> > session key is encrypted with your and the recipients' key. That way, 
> > the message may have a large number of recipients, but doesn't increase 
> > in size as much.
> 
> This is correct.  PGP encryption generates a random symmetric key of
> a large size -- essentially a really long password.  It encrypts the
> original message using that "session key".  The session key is included
> in the PGP output alongside the encrypted message, but it's encrypted
> once for each recipient.  This gives huge space savings in the final
> message, compared to encrypting the message once per recipient.
> 
> When you decrypt, PGP finds the list of encryptions of the symmetric key
> and searches for the one encrypted with your public key.  It decrypts
> that to get the session key, then uses the session key to decrypt the
> original message.
> 
> There are two ways to store that list of session key crypts.  The
> default is like a dictionary -- each ciphertext is indexed with the
> key ID that encrypted it.  When PGP decrypts this, it can quickly zip
> right to the correct session ciphertext.  The other way stores these
> ciphertexts anonymously -- not indexed by key ID.  This is more secure,
> but slower because PGP must try each one in turn to find the correct
> ciphertext.  It's not a problem for a few recipients though -- it's
> really only a performance problem with many separate recipients.
> 
> -- 
> David Champion • d...@bikeshed.us


Reply via email to