On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 01:05:06PM +0100, Eliot Lear wrote: > Hi, > > This smells a lot more like an attempt to inhibit lawful intercept than > it does to stop a bad guy spying on email.
Hardly, they can still intercept it, it would just be encrypted. There are multiple levels of privacy: 1) A communicated with B, but the nature of the comms is uncharacterised. 2) A communicated with B (using email) 3) A communicated with B, the email had contents X Encryption should defeat 3, leaving 1 & 2. I'm suggesting a way to also defeat 2, or at least make its recognition more difficult. None of these prevent 1. This is an attempt to make bulk interception, and its offline post facto analysis more awkward. It'll have no effect upon targetted inteception. (since there one could see the DNS queries, and know which were for SMTP). But, if there is not interest in this; I guess I'll drop it. DF _______________________________________________ perpass mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass
