[cryptography] The next gen P2P secure email solution

tpb-crypto at laposte.net tpb-crypto at laposte.net
Thu May 15 08:36:23 EDT 2014


> Message du 13/05/14 05:55
> De : "grarpamp" 
> A : cypherpunks at cpunks.org
> Copie à : p2p-hackers at lists.zooko.com, cryptography at randombit.net
> Objet : Re: [cryptography] The next gen P2P secure email solution
>

> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 11:49 AM, rysiek  wrote:
> > Dnia wtorek, 22 kwietnia 2014 20:58:50 tpb-crypto at laposte.net pisze:
> >> Although technical solutions are feasible
> 
> Then do it and see what happens.
> 
> >> we ought to consider some things:
> >> - Email is older than the web itself;
> 
> So is TCP/IP and the transistor. Irrelevant.
> 

You clearly did not get the point, but let's move along your argument.

> >> - Email has three times as many users as all social networks combined;
> 
> And how did those nets get any users when 'email' was
> supposedly working just fine?
> 

E-mail not allowing one to make his ego appreciated and envied in a structured nicely formatted page maybe?

> >> - Email is entrenched in the offices, many a business is powered by it;
> 
> They are powered by authorized access to and useful end use of message
> content, not by email. That's not going anywhere, only the intermediate
> transport is being redesigned.
> 

Can you recode outlook, eudora and other closed source stuff people use(d) for e-mail handling for business? No? Well, that answers why it is hard to remove.

> >> Given the enormous energy necessary to remove such an appliance and replace
> 
> Removal is different from introducing competitive alternatives.
> 

Little proprietary walled gardens are absolutely not the answer for this problem.

> >> it with something better. How could we make a secure solution that plays
> >> nicely with the current tools without disturbing too much what is already
> >> established?
> >
> > By writing a gateway (i.e. between RetroShare and e-mail)?
> 

The gateway idea is interesting, but it has to be efficient enough and low cost enough for people to switch over. Something like bitmessage is not.

> MUA's become file readers and composers. They hand off
> to a localhost daemon that recognizes different address formats
> of the network[s] and does the right thing. Perhaps they compile
> against additional necessary network/crypto libs. Whatever it
> is, those are not a big change. Ditching centralized SMTP transport
> in the clear is... and for the better.
> 

http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/05/good-news-for-privacy-fewer-servers-sending-e-mail-naked-facebook-finds/

I think that answers your concern about SMTP transport in the clear, in less than one year the darkest bar in that chart will be close to 100%. If 80% of hosts demand strict encrypted transport, it will force the other 20% to change. Considering the snowden revelations and the fact that one year ago we barely used encrypted transport, having 1/4 already and accelerating is a good prospect.

> Reread the threads, forget about that old SMTP box, think new.

Fixing the problem is better than overhauling all offices in the world, you clearly haven't been in may offices in your life.

> _______________________________________________
> cryptography mailing list
> cryptography at randombit.net
> http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
>


More information about the cryptography mailing list