Ya I'm starting to understand the problem they are trying to solve, that is
how to keep the "meta-data" safe.
So assuming you encoded a message, the sender and the receiver is public
information and so is the routeing.
I think this tries to "obfuscate" sender in that all messages are moved to
all end points, you try your "key" against all messages to find yours.
An interesting idea, but the powers that be can easily just make a blanket
statement like all users of said system are "aiding and abetting" { insert
baddie name here }
Remember if your not doing something bad you have nothing to hide, and do
not need to take part in such a scheme to protect those that are doing bad
things.On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Michael Muller <[email protected]> wrote: > > Chris Knadle wrote: > > On 2013-08-17 16:24, Joseph Apuzzo wrote: > > > In light of the inherent flaws, lax security model of current email, > > > bitmessage has been suggested as an alternative. I want to see your > > > comment > > > on what you think of such a system. > > > > > > Since I have never been an admin for email on a server I am not able to > > > say > > > if this is good or bad. > > > > I don't think it's a replacement for email. Now, when it comes to > > "the lax security model of email", have a look into ESMTPS, which some > email > > services use. ESMTPS encrypts the email transfer, such that the user > > doesn't need to do anything special for this to happen. ESMTPS is still > > important even when using GPG-encrypted messages, because GPG encrypts > > the body of the message but not who the message is To/From or the > Subject. > > There are a bunch of email services using ESMTPS today, and you wouldn't > > know it until you look at the mail headers for messages you've received. > > ;-) [Look for ESMTPS and/or TLS in the Received: lines.] > > > > > Sounds good, but that usually ends up meaning its not.... > > > > > > https://bitmessage.org/bitmessage.pdf [1] > > > https://bitmessage.org/wiki/Main_Page [2] > > > > This sounds more like a "secure Twitter protocol" than an email > > protocol. > > Yeah, I looked into it at one point and my impression was that it was more > about secure/anonymous _broadcast_ than direct person to person > communication. > > you could use it for transmission, though, assuming you have the > recipient's > public key. Encrypt a message for the recipient and then broadcast it. > Everyone gets it, but only the recipient can read it. And no one can tell > where either of you are. > > > > > -- Chris > > > > -- > > > > Chris Knadle > > [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > > Mid-Hudson Valley Linux Users Group http://mhvlug.org > > http://mhvlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mhvlug > > > > Upcoming Meetings (6pm - 8pm) Vassar College > > Sep 4 - NoSQL and MongoDB > > Oct 2 - OpenFlow: Open Standard for Networking Hardware > > Nov 6 - November Meeting > > > > > > ============================================================================= > michaelMuller = [email protected] | http://www.mindhog.net/~mmuller > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > We are explorers in the further reaches of experience: demons to some, > angels > to others. - "Pinhead" from "Hellraiser" > > ============================================================================= > _______________________________________________ > Mid-Hudson Valley Linux Users Group http://mhvlug.org > http://mhvlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mhvlug > > Upcoming Meetings (6pm - 8pm) Vassar College > Sep 4 - NoSQL and MongoDB > Oct 2 - OpenFlow: Open Standard for Networking Hardware > Nov 6 - November Meeting > -- /** ** Joseph Apuzzo **/
_______________________________________________ Mid-Hudson Valley Linux Users Group http://mhvlug.org http://mhvlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mhvlug Upcoming Meetings (6pm - 8pm) Vassar College Sep 4 - NoSQL and MongoDB Oct 2 - OpenFlow: Open Standard for Networking Hardware Nov 6 - November Meeting
