lvh

40 ms·

301.
by lvh 7y ago
Sure! Use minisign/signify, and see OpenBSD for an example of people who do this who care extremely deeply about non-repudiation.
302.
by lvh 7y ago
That’s true, but they’re not widely supported, so you can’t count on them to communicate. It’s also really hard to know for laypeople if the result is safe or not, so it’s dangerous to train them to accept encrypted ZIPs. Plus, as long as y
303.
by lvh 7y ago
If a bug happens in more than a handful of implementations, there’s a good chance the protocol is to blame. Perfect examples of where this emphatically is the case is MDC (PGP and Telegram are the only two common protocols in use I can thin
304.
by lvh 7y ago
You can make people install engimail, but there are problems with email enigmail does not solve (this article), problems with with PGP it does not solve (our other PGP article), that have directly resulted in serious vulnerabilities for Eni
305.
by lvh 7y ago
That sounds congruent with both GP’s point, and the intent of the author.
306.
by lvh 7y ago
Sure! But a screenshot is trivial to forge anyway, and even if you block PrScrn, people can always taddle. The goal is to get the message safely to the recipient, not prevent the recipient from disclosing anything afterwards. (Non-repudiati
307.
by lvh 7y ago
"Per se" is doing a lot of work there. When 'tptacek first heard of efail, we were both in the office, he called me over and said "if there was a disastrous GPG bug that fails in way $X, what would it look like" and
308.
by lvh 7y ago
You can generally just claim that it was never signed, so you usually need some other mechanism (technical or legal) anyway. This does work the other direction (term of art “non-repudiation”), where the sender can’t claim the message wasn’t
309.
by lvh 7y ago
How do I securely communicate what the new email address is? How do I hide IP-level metadata? How do I hide time-level metadata? How do I do PFS? At some point you're going to keep adding lipstick to the pig until eventually you have s
310.
by lvh 7y ago
> I can't do that with Whatsapp because it's closed source. I can't do that with Signal because nobody has Signal. Everyone has email. Are you saying the install base for people who use GPG with e-mail is larger than the u
311.
by lvh 7y ago
My only annotation here is that I think MDC was added in the early 2000s, after HMAC. My understanding is it's not so much that we hadn't figured out real authenticators, it's that the people designing PGP didn't believe
312.
by lvh 7y ago
Great point! Sorry, I should have been clearer: the pernicious part is in _explaining how PGP and encrypted is bad_, which is a Herculean task because there's always another little use case broken in its own subtle way. TLS and SSH hav
313.
by lvh 7y ago
There's something crappy-ish and similar for email with DKIM. That doesn't sound the same, because it's the server signing, not the sender -- but in this protocol you're kinda already trusting the server anyway. The crit
314.
by lvh 7y ago
If you're going to do 1.2 and 1.3 and get everyone to make massive changes to how they operate, why not just use a secure messenger instead of trying to shoehorn privacy onto a protocol designed for when the Internet had like five comp
315.
by lvh 7y ago
There's not "one" PGP vuln: one of the things that makes PGP so pernicious is that it's a spec, a de facto implementation (GPG), an ecosystem used in different contexts (e.g. enterprise file transfer, but also e-mail) by
316.
by lvh 7y ago
I do not think it is meaningfully possible to fix that system (I say meaningfully, because I'm excepting the pathological senses I mentioned above). If you want it to look, feel like email and be compatible, you can't secure it. M
317.
by lvh 7y ago
I did not call your arguments pathological, I called my own examples pathological to clarify that I am not trying to strawman you: I appreciate that my own examples are almost certainly not what people have in mind when they talk about emai
318.
by lvh 7y ago
"Completely open" is not the only useful property to discuss about a system. Email itself is still fundamentally terrible for secure messaging. Your argument seems to boil down to: "bitcoin is open", "bitcoin can $X
319.
Stop Using Encrypted Email(latacora.micro.blog)
475 points by lvh 7y ago|547 comments
320.
by lvh 7y ago
PASETO is designed to be resilient against insecure implementation, just as its primitives were. You can do things to make stuff like Ed25519 unsafe (see, for example, a myriad of double-spend attacks), but they involve off-label use, which
321.
by lvh 7y ago
Whoa, thanks! I've used the compose key for a long time (I'm an amateur Polish speaker who also occasionally writes French) and I never realized it was order-insensitive!
322.
by lvh 7y ago
Hm. I'm not sure I follow and I use Fusion regularly and FreeCAD a little. Does the property editor/spreadsheet in FreeCAD not count? You change a value, the dependencies get recomputed. Works about the same as in Fusion and certa
323.
by lvh 7y ago
FreeCAD generally feels more like a traditional CAD program to me. I'd use OpenSCAD, but can't for my application: OpenSCAD fundamentally uses imprecise shape approximations. You draw a sphere but get a high-poly ball, sorta like
324.
by lvh 7y ago
It seems strange that compose u o → ů is u-with-circle-on-top, but compose U G → Ğ is G-with-u-on-top, since it means it's sometimes modifier-first and sometimes base-first. (FWIW I use the compose key! Just not those particular charac
325.
by lvh 7y ago
Thanks! I didn't know about :jss and will happily concede that's equivalent to the Clojure version.
326.
by lvh 7y ago
It does not seem easier to me to use Java libs from ABCL than Clojure. Some Java: public class Main { public int addTwoNumbers(int a, int b) { return a + b; } } Calling it from ABCL: (defun void-function (param)
327.
by lvh 7y ago
They do, and, thanks to GraalVM’s Substrate compiler, the same technique is also available for Clojure directly on the JVM. I imagine you’re going to pay some cost in both cases, perhaps in different places. (I imagine with Cloture it might
328.
by lvh 7y ago
Not that I'd know: but at some point after the nineties Usenet figured out PAR files too, so you wouldn't quite need all the chunks because NNTP servers would drop some of them occasionally -- though to your point, yes, every NNTP
329.
by lvh 7y ago
Aha, but the general idea is still "show the current thing while I'm futzing around to make the next thing happen"?
330.
by lvh 7y ago
Huh. Why is that useful? (Since some projectors have it built in I imagine there's a use case I'm missing.) Splash screen while you figure out your presentation on your mirror but without the stress of your audience watching you c

More ›