Re: [Cryptography] Usage models (was Re: In the face of cooperative end-points, PFS doesn't help)
On 08/09/2013 21:51, Perry E. Metzger wrote: I wrote about this a couple of weeks ago, see: http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2013-August/016872.html In short, https to a server that you /do/ trust. Problem is, joe average is not going to set up his own server. Making setting up your own server user friendly is the same problem as making OTR user friendly, with knobs on. ___ The cryptography mailing list cryptography@metzdowd.com http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
Re: [Cryptography] Usage models (was Re: In the face of cooperative end-points, PFS doesn't help)
On 08/09/2013 21:51, Perry E. Metzger wrote: On Sun, 8 Sep 2013 14:50:07 -0400 Jerry Leichter leich...@lrw.com wrote: Even for one-to-one discussions, these days, people want transparent movement across their hardware. If I'm in a chat session on my laptop and leave the house, I'd like to be able to continue on my phone. How do I hand off the conversation - and the keys? I wrote about this a couple of weeks ago, see: http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2013-August/016872.html Which is pretty spot-on and one of my biggest gripes about OTR. It just doesn't mesh at all with user's expectations. In summary, it would appear that the most viable solution is to make the end-to-end encryption endpoint a piece of hardware the user owns (say the oft mentioned $50 Raspberry Pi class machine on their home net) and let the user interact with it over an encrypted connection (say running a normal protocol like Jabber client to server protocol over TLS, or IMAP over TLS, or https: and a web client.) Sounds like another Freedom Box... Anyway, if we consider each device an end-point to a group-chat that has to be verified at least once by another end-point (and that is a somewhat doable thing, e.g. the socialist millionaire's problem), what about having end-points being able to vouch for other end-points? For example if I introduce my smartphone to an already existing instant messaging chat, I can vouch for it through my PC and if other end-points already trust my PC, there is no reason not to trust my smartphone either. If this is a dumb idea, feel free to point it out. Regards, Walter ___ The cryptography mailing list cryptography@metzdowd.com http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
Re: [Cryptography] Usage models (was Re: In the face of cooperative end-points, PFS doesn't help)
On Sep 8, 2013, at 11:41 PM, james hughes wrote: In summary, it would appear that the most viable solution is to make I don't see how it's possible to make any real progress within the existing cloud model, so I'm with you 100% here. (I've said the same earlier.) Could cloud computing be a red herring? Banks and phone companies all give up personal information to governments (Verizon?) and have been doing this long before and long after cloud computing was a fad It's a matter of context. For data I'm deliberately sharing with some company - sure, cloud is fine. As I mentioned elsewhere, if the NSA wants to spend huge resources to break in to my purchasing transactions with Amazon, I may care as a citizen that they are wasting their money - but as a personal matter, it's not all that much of a big deal, as that information is already being gathered, aggregated, bought, and sold on a mass basis. If they want to know about my buying habits and financial transactions, Axciom can sell them all they need for a couple of bucks. On the other hand, I don't want them recording my chats or email or phone conversations. It's *that* stuff that is out in the cloud these days, and as long as it remains out there in a form that someone other than I and those I'm communicating with can decrypt, it's subject to attacks - attacks so pervasive that I don't see how you could ever built a system (technical or legal) to protect against them. The only way to win is not to play. -- Jerry ___ The cryptography mailing list cryptography@metzdowd.com http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
Re: [Cryptography] Usage models (was Re: In the face of cooperative end-points, PFS doesn't help)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 9/8/13 1:51 PM, Perry E. Metzger wrote: On Sun, 8 Sep 2013 14:50:07 -0400 Jerry Leichter leich...@lrw.com wrote: Even for one-to-one discussions, these days, people want transparent movement across their hardware. If I'm in a chat session on my laptop and leave the house, I'd like to be able to continue on my phone. How do I hand off the conversation - and the keys? I wrote about this a couple of weeks ago, see: http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2013-August/016872.html In summary, it would appear that the most viable solution is to make the end-to-end encryption endpoint a piece of hardware the user owns (say the oft mentioned $50 Raspberry Pi class machine on their home net) and let the user interact with it over an encrypted connection (say running a normal protocol like Jabber client to server protocol over TLS, or IMAP over TLS, or https: and a web client.) Yes, that is a possibility. Personally I'm still mulling over whether we'd want your little home device to be a Jabber server (typically requiring a stable IP address or an FQDN), a standard Jabber client connected to some other server (which might be a personal server at your VPS or a small-scale server for friends and family), or something outside of XMPP entirely that merely advertises its reachability via some other protocol over Jabber (in its vCard or presence information). It is a compromise, but one that fits with the usage pattern almost everyone has gotten used to. It cannot be done with the existing cloud model, though -- the user needs to own the box or we can't simultaneously maintain current protocols (and thus current clients) and current usage patterns. I very much agree. Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSLQUgAAoJEOoGpJErxa2p9NUP/3R2p37pupeFB3GV5NJt1sN9 kOO+P9TXO8Ra3WXeQcNcwe43tVfpKlJIbHa9tZbs5Mvl6F2TSqChTxZ2ftS178Ul QAhX3SuztbPr7LUjROmmwLBVHr9k06LMVjSM4B5XFk3uGV+5IrTfpRkBLH7UB7vh 9mA21Zu/tGjUNPZBbHJIqXHhHMFTS4ewUznEwr4vT87xVkcG2yJ385IF/6Q22a1u n6hWuLPcWwABROIXRhZ/wDafEKnchUGiAICiGpAjd6Ngrc3gzvsOGPjcIdFS9sO8 SWO1W+AJQi6HlcnMrmlmlRJL/pBkQbOvV97/VozOKmwdP7a6LZ+OcRkpyy4HrV2C 5KBvYrl66G/G6WaWF9juRbjSvQLhpJ6CkSJ0vwfttCfI2oTmAGo/+d/L1V6Pdmv5 RYWoON6wyHTOTmvmewEcjHGzTKgae+u4BcbzZND1vpaoN4Wo5eXWQ5NkAUzK1INY NIz4kORhnHsGOfy8SCKV7WO6JQHFzFc7hZMZ8y0VkfozVK1N0IJRxPblWynI/wo6 xy3WtCWvAmCmDL0fm0SdVC3K85hJFD2kbPQWoqyKPq700PjE4/WJyL4/0Eu2cYa5 m9rB/vM5Cdkrv9LEJtZjQ7Ro0flV21P+rr2iZXVSXPVbzuj4K4oRGihcXwD9E/B7 +o+v/Ckzamfi1fpawnDk =ICV8 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ The cryptography mailing list cryptography@metzdowd.com http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
