5 ms·

No, they could just transmit PGP encrypted emails down IMAP and the user could decrypt them with any number of popular PGP implementations. Your IMAP/SMTP passw

No, they could just transmit PGP encrypted emails down IMAP and the user could decrypt them with any number of popular PGP implementations. Your IMAP/SMTP password doesn't necessarily have to be the same as your PGP key password, nor should you even need to give Protonmail your PGP private key (password protected or not), nor does IMAP/SMTP even have to be authenticated with a password (GMail notably pioneered an OAuth-based extension to both).

deftnerd 8y ago
Protonmail's method of encryption allows them to encrypt the entire message, including headers/metadata. It also encrypts the messages received that weren't encrypted when they weren't first sent. Your suggested method basically is no different from any other provider. You rely on the sender encrypting the message and header information is entirely unencrypted on the disk.
- Sir_Cmpwn 8y ago
  >Protonmail's method of encryption allows them to encrypt the entire message, including headers/metadata I would prefer to see them promote standards to extend PGP rather than invest that time in a new, proprietary system with no buy-in from the email-related-software development community. I can follow the logic but I can also see their eyes lighting up when they realize this is a great excuse for having a proprietary, locked-in platform. >It also encrypts the messages received that weren't encrypted when they weren't first sent This could be done with PGP
- bartbutler 8y ago
  Headers are not encrypted in OpenPGP and not in ProtonMail. Message and attachment content is.
subway 8y ago
Is there a way to encrypt message headers while using IMAP? My understanding of Protonmail's argument (not that I agree with it) is they encrypt the full message, including headers upon accepting it. Based on my understanding of IMAP, you're effectively looking at a new protocol once you do everything needed to decrypt headers on the client-side.
- u801e 8y ago
  > Is there a way to encrypt message headers while using IMAP? Other than the Received, Delivered-To and Return-Path headers added by the intermediate MTA servers, every other header in the original message could be encryped, along with the message body when it's delivered to the server (or appended via IMAP).
bartbutler 8y ago
This is completely ignoring key management as a barrier to using encryption, not to mention manually syncing local keystore with the server, not being able to provision keys across devices, etc. In other words, why PGP and email encryption in general has largely been a failure over multiple decades. It's too complex and too difficult.
- Sir_Cmpwn 8y ago
  None of these difficulties prevent you from making the access available. It has no bearing on users who already choose not to use IMAP. This is a pretty bad excuse.
  - bartbutler 8y ago
    Only if you completely discount the related costs of building and maintaining such an additional API as well as the customer service impact of basically allowing users to screw up their own key management.
    - Sir_Cmpwn 8y ago
      Even if I concede this to you (and I don't), you've already written an IMAP/SMTP bridge that solves these problems. Open source it and make it available to free users and the problem disappears (well, is reduced. Most non-technical users don't know how to run a daemon after all, and making them put it on their own infrastructure is lame as hell).
      - bartbutler 8y ago
        Because running PGP software and handling key management locally is way easier than double-clicking on an installer? I don't concede that for a second. Remember that the alternative you want is ciphertext directly via IMAP, which is not at all user-friendly, which is exactly why we didn't do it. As for the bridge, that is exactly what we'd like to do, as I've said before. And customer support time and developer time devoted to this would cost money and represents an opportunity cost as well and that's a fact, not a point to be conceded.

deftnerd 8y ago

Protonmail's method of encryption allows them to encrypt the entire message, including headers/metadata. It also encrypts the messages received that weren't encrypted when they weren't first sent. Your suggested method basically is no different from any other provider. You rely on the sender encrypting the message and header information is entirely unencrypted on the disk.

Sir_Cmpwn 8y ago
>Protonmail's method of encryption allows them to encrypt the entire message, including headers/metadata I would prefer to see them promote standards to extend PGP rather than invest that time in a new, proprietary system with no buy-in from the email-related-software development community. I can follow the logic but I can also see their eyes lighting up when they realize this is a great excuse for having a proprietary, locked-in platform. >It also encrypts the messages received that weren't encrypted when they weren't first sent This could be done with PGP
bartbutler 8y ago
Headers are not encrypted in OpenPGP and not in ProtonMail. Message and attachment content is.

subway 8y ago

Is there a way to encrypt message headers while using IMAP? My understanding of Protonmail's argument (not that I agree with it) is they encrypt the full message, including headers upon accepting it. Based on my understanding of IMAP, you're effectively looking at a new protocol once you do everything needed to decrypt headers on the client-side.

u801e 8y ago
> Is there a way to encrypt message headers while using IMAP? Other than the Received, Delivered-To and Return-Path headers added by the intermediate MTA servers, every other header in the original message could be encryped, along with the message body when it's delivered to the server (or appended via IMAP).

bartbutler 8y ago

This is completely ignoring key management as a barrier to using encryption, not to mention manually syncing local keystore with the server, not being able to provision keys across devices, etc. In other words, why PGP and email encryption in general has largely been a failure over multiple decades. It's too complex and too difficult.

Sir_Cmpwn 8y ago
None of these difficulties prevent you from making the access available. It has no bearing on users who already choose not to use IMAP. This is a pretty bad excuse.
- bartbutler 8y ago
  Only if you completely discount the related costs of building and maintaining such an additional API as well as the customer service impact of basically allowing users to screw up their own key management.
  - Sir_Cmpwn 8y ago
    Even if I concede this to you (and I don't), you've already written an IMAP/SMTP bridge that solves these problems. Open source it and make it available to free users and the problem disappears (well, is reduced. Most non-technical users don't know how to run a daemon after all, and making them put it on their own infrastructure is lame as hell).
    - bartbutler 8y ago
      Because running PGP software and handling key management locally is way easier than double-clicking on an installer? I don't concede that for a second. Remember that the alternative you want is ciphertext directly via IMAP, which is not at all user-friendly, which is exactly why we didn't do it. As for the bridge, that is exactly what we'd like to do, as I've said before. And customer support time and developer time devoted to this would cost money and represents an opportunity cost as well and that's a fact, not a point to be conceded.