On 3/9/2011 8:11 AM, Ben McGinnes wrote: > Personally, I think it's an interesting idea and I can see the value > in it, but I'm not sure there are enough people really pushing for it > (yet). With things like the data retention legislation being pushed > in Europe, Australia and other countries, that may change.
It seems like this is really close to asking for private stream searching, which would be the next logical step -- some way for the client to query the database for a record in such a way there is no way for the database to know what was queried. This may sound alluring, but it's an ephemera. The current best-known PSS algorithm requires about one zebibyte of traffic to do a ten-character ASCII search. These sorts of blinded searches are really tempting, but there are enormous theoretical hurdles to be cleared. I would respectfully suggest that if any discussion moves to PSS-type functionality, that discussion be headed off at the pass. :) ("Private searching on streaming data" by R. Ostrovsky: PDF available at http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.78.631&rep=rep1&type=pdf ). _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users