4 ms·
> For email, the same thing isn't true, so messages can be decrypted on the server (otherwise the mail client could never read them). I'm not a crypto guy, so
by david_shaw 13y ago
> For email, the same thing isn't true, so messages can be decrypted on the server (otherwise the mail client could never read them).
I'm not a crypto guy, so forgive my potential ignorance.
Are you saying that because the crypto is being done on a potentially untrusted client (whether a web interface or third-party email client), that the end-to-end encryption could be compromised?
I realize that e-mail (by protocol) is sent over plaintext, but if the entire content of the e-mail is PGP encrypted, how is that less secure than actual end-to-end encryption?
- JshWright 13y agoWith email, you _can't_ encrypt the headers of message. Who the message is to, who it's from, when it was sent, what the subject line is... All those things need to be accessible to every server that touches the message from creation to delivery. Things get worse when you have to interoperate with mail clients that don't support encryption. Now the best you can do is encrypt the body of the message at rest, but you still have to be able to decrypt it to deliver it. You're absolutely right that _if_ both parties are using PGP in their clients, then the _body_ of the email will be secure, end to end (not the meta data mind you, just the body). However, that requires a lot of manual key management (assuming you use a client that supports it in the first place). That key management nightmare is why no one actually uses PGP...
- StavrosK 13y agoWhat JshWright said is correct. Specifically for Silent Mail, the mail server is the last thing that can decrypt (because it has to work with plain clients), so it can see your plaintext. With Silent Text, the last thing that can decrypt is the client, so Silent Circle can never see your plaintext. That's what was wrong with it specifically.