Re: Don't send encrypted messages to random users

2017-05-31 Thread MFPA 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512



On Tuesday 30 May 2017 at 8:42:04 PM, in
, Michael
Englehorn wrote:-


> Also, it would be strange to only publish your key's
> "name only" UID to the
> keyserver, because then at a keysigning event I
> wouldn't know where to
> send your public key back to, and I couldn't certify
> any of your e-mail
> addresses.


A user can use hashed instead of human-readable forms of their name
and/or their email address in a key's user-ids. The email address (or
name) cannot be determined from simple inspection of the UID. Just a
defence against casual snooping on the information in user-ids, not a
security measure but the "incident" that gave rise to this thread is
prevented. The downside is that using the cleartext email address (or
name) as your search string doesn't find the key from a keyserver and
the email client fails to match the key by email address, rendering
those UIDs largely useless.

It has been discussed here before, and dismissed by people cleverer
than me, that the hashed version could be searched for as well as the
readable version to locate a key from the local keyring or from
keyservers. A member of PGPNET produced some Python scripts as an
exercise in seeing what might go into this, when we last discussed the
idea over there about three years ago.

- --
Best regards

MFPA  

No matter where you go, there you are.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
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=ndHi
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Re: Don't send encrypted messages to random users

2017-05-30 Thread Phil Pennock 
On 2017-05-29 at 18:58 +, listo factor via Gnupg-users wrote:
> This I find surprising: if one does not want receiving
> encrypted messages from those that he does not have
> existing relationship with, why does he publish his
> public key on public keyservers?

(1) Who says they published it?  If person A has a PGP key and shares it
with a group of people, anyone in that group can upload it to the
keyservers.  The keyservers are a _swamp_.  Smelly and polluted.
Still useful (I run one and help others) but presence of data in the
keyservers means very little.

(2) I sign software releases of security-sensitive code (Exim,
sieve-connect, etc); lots of people need to be able to validate the
signatures upon that code.  I'm quite proud of Exim's history of
making sure that signatures upon releases can be verified, with keys
in the Strong Set, etc.

(3) If I publish just signing subkeys, not encryption subkeys, but
someone uses finger(1) to get the full key and uploads it to the
keyservers, then inconsistent old data is present if I don't then
keep the keyserver data at least "current".

(4) Very occasionally I receive security reports of potential issues
relating to Exim, or mail other people and want them to be able to
reply encrypted.  Having the encryption key present allows
encryption to take place.  This does not mean that I'm willing to be
Everyone's Test Oracle That Things Work When They Learn.  There are
seven billion people on the planet but I have little interest in
being the unpaid test subject for most of those people.  I am
interested in the one or two encrypted messages I get per year from
strangers which are actually sensitive and where it benefits _me_ to
decrypt it.

(5) If talking encrypted requires work from person A and person B, then
talking encrypted had better benefit both person A and person B.  If
person A benefits but person B doesn't but person B isn't given any
choice in the matter, this becomes a tax drain on time and resources
and a sense of entitlement from A that they're some special
snowflake who should be able to demand free time and attention from
anyone on the Internet that they feel like pestering does not make
it right for them to do so.

If I need to talk to someone in person at a party and they don't know
me, I might go up, cough discreetly, wait for them to acknowledge and
ask me what's up, then chat and see how things go from there.  I don't
go up and interrupt what they're doing and shout in their face that they
must drop everything and help me out Right Now.  Not unless lives are on
the line and to date, I've been fortunate that they never have been.

It's called good manners.

-Phil


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Re: Don't send encrypted messages to random users

2017-05-30 Thread Robert J. Hansen 
So you don't mind when telemarketers call you?A public listing is not permission to annoy.___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Re: Don't send encrypted messages to random users

2017-05-30 Thread Michael Englehorn 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

"Michael A. Yetto"  writes:

> On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:53:44 +
> listo factor via Gnupg-users  writes, and having
> writ moves on:
>
>>On 05/29/2017 11:52 PM, Konstantin Gribov - gros...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Primary reason to publish a key is to make it available for
>>> fetching. It isn't a permission for anyone to annoy a person
>>> anyhow.  
>>
>>Keservers have every characteristic of a public directory.
>>
>>What possible reason there could be for placing one's
>>e-mail in the public key if not to make it possible
>>for anyone to send an e-mail to the owner. To make
>>a piece of information publicly available on the net
>>and then depend on "netiquette" for that piece of
>>information not be used in a manner the owner finds
>>objectionable strikes me as a rather outdated notion.
>>
>
> Would you find it acceptable for someone to randomly call you and ask
> your opinion on a topic of their choosing just because your phone
> number happens to be on a public directory that person happened upon?
>
> The reason, not only possible, but likely, would be to let someone with
> a reason to send message to that e-mail have the necessary data to
> encrypt it and keep it as private as is needed.
>
> Mike Yetto

Depending on what the content of the e-mail is about, I don't think it
would be inappropriate for someone who I didn't know to contact me,
especially if it was about something I normally work on such as an
opensource project that has my name and e-mail attached to it.

My e-mail address is easy to find in places other than the keyservers,
and if you don't put your key on the keyserver it may be dificult for
someone to send me something like a security impacting bug report using
encryption.

Also, it would be strange to only publish your key's "name only" UID to the
keyserver, because then at a keysigning event I wouldn't know where to
send your public key back to, and I couldn't certify any of your e-mail
addresses.

The same goes for phone calls, though I do heavily filter my home phone
line with some IVR scripts and such to prevent autodialer spam.

That being said, sending 'hey, I'm just testing' messages to me would be weird.

- -Michael Englehorn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
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=ceKU
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Re: Don't send encrypted messages to random users

2017-05-30 Thread Michael A. Yetto 
On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:53:44 +
listo factor via Gnupg-users  writes, and having
writ moves on:

>On 05/29/2017 11:52 PM, Konstantin Gribov - gros...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Primary reason to publish a key is to make it available for
>> fetching. It isn't a permission for anyone to annoy a person
>> anyhow.  
>
>Keservers have every characteristic of a public directory.
>
>What possible reason there could be for placing one's
>e-mail in the public key if not to make it possible
>for anyone to send an e-mail to the owner. To make
>a piece of information publicly available on the net
>and then depend on "netiquette" for that piece of
>information not be used in a manner the owner finds
>objectionable strikes me as a rather outdated notion.
>

Would you find it acceptable for someone to randomly call you and ask
your opinion on a topic of their choosing just because your phone
number happens to be on a public directory that person happened upon?

The reason, not only possible, but likely, would be to let someone with
a reason to send message to that e-mail have the necessary data to
encrypt it and keep it as private as is needed.

Mike Yetto
-- 
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the
point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one."
 - George Bernard Shaw


pgp8XGG3Qh5vZ.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Re: Don't send encrypted messages to random users

2017-05-30 Thread Brad Rogers 
On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:53:44 +
listo factor via Gnupg-users  wrote:

Hello listo,

>a piece of information publicly available on the net
>and then depend on "netiquette" for that piece of
>information not be used in a manner the owner finds

To paraphrase what's been said by others (and you appear to have
ignored).  Just because a thing *can* be done, doesn't mean it _should_
be done.

To explain further;

Do you telephone people selected, at random, from a phone directory?
Probably not.  It's the same thing here.

-- 
 Regards  _
 / )   "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)radnever immediately apparent"
Did you do it for fame, did you do it in a fit?
Identity - X-Ray Spex


pgp_0HGqSlHvq.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Re: Don't send encrypted messages to random users

2017-05-30 Thread listo factor via Gnupg-users 

On 05/29/2017 11:52 PM, Konstantin Gribov - gros...@gmail.com wrote:

Primary reason to publish a key is to make it available for fetching. It
isn't a permission for anyone to annoy a person anyhow.


Keservers have every characteristic of a public directory.

What possible reason there could be for placing one's
e-mail in the public key if not to make it possible
for anyone to send an e-mail to the owner. To make
a piece of information publicly available on the net
and then depend on "netiquette" for that piece of
information not be used in a manner the owner finds
objectionable strikes me as a rather outdated notion.


___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Re: Don't send encrypted messages to random users

2017-05-30 Thread Konstantin Gribov 
Yes, they could. But publishing all subkeys is simpler than publishing some
of them. And key is usually generated with both sign and encryption subkey
as many guides, howtos etc guide people to.

To look at such test emails from the other point of view just imagine that
someone found your email on public repo/bugtracker/ml starts to spam you
with test emails. Such an event certainly would upset me.

Another thing which shocked me is statistics from Golang folks [1]. Brad
Fitzpatrick said:
> 99% of the PGP-encrypted emails we get to secur...@golang.org are bogus
security reports. Whereas "cleartext" security reports are only about 5-10%
bogus. Getting a PGP-encrypted email to secur...@golang.org has basically
become a reliable signal that the report is going to be bogus, so I stopped
caring about spending the 5 minutes decrypting the damn thing (logging in
to the key server to get the key, remembering how to use gpg).
> ...
> In summary, the PGP tooling sucks (especially in gmail, but really
everywhere) and it's too often used by people who are more interested in
using PGP than reporting valid security issues.

When he says "cleartext" it's plain text send over TLS MTA-to-MTA
connections. Almost all mail providers use starttls now.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14123388

вт, 30 мая 2017, 8:46 Ineiev :

> On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 11:52:27PM +, Konstantin Gribov wrote:
> >
> > As an example, many open source devs are publishing their keys which they
> > use for signing software releases but rarely for encrypted communication.
>
> On the other hand, they could publish certificates without encrypting
> subkeys.
>
-- 

Best regards,
Konstantin Gribov
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Re: Don't send encrypted messages to random users

2017-05-29 Thread Ineiev 
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 11:52:27PM +, Konstantin Gribov wrote:
> 
> As an example, many open source devs are publishing their keys which they
> use for signing software releases but rarely for encrypted communication.

On the other hand, they could publish certificates without encrypting
subkeys.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Re: Don't send encrypted messages to random users

2017-05-29 Thread Konstantin Gribov 
Primary reason to publish a key is to make it available for fetching. It
isn't a permission for anyone to annoy a person anyhow.

As an example, many open source devs are publishing their keys which they
use for signing software releases but rarely for encrypted communication.

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 2:28 AM listo factor via Gnupg-users <
gnupg-users@gnupg.org> wrote:

> This I find surprising: if one does not want receiving
> encrypted messages from those that he does not have
> existing relationship with, why does he publish his
> public key on public keyservers?
>
> ___
> Gnupg-users mailing list
> Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
> http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
>
-- 

Best regards,
Konstantin Gribov
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Re: Don't send encrypted messages to random users

2017-05-29 Thread Robert J. Hansen 
> This I find surprising: if one does not want receiving
> encrypted messages from those that he does not have
> existing relationship with, why does he publish his
> public key on public keyservers?

All presence on the keyservers says is, "if you have something to send
me, you may send it securely".  It is not a permission to send someone
email they'd prefer to avoid.

Further, the conduct the OP is talking about amounts to dragooning
someone into helping you without first asking them whether they're
willing to help you.

___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Don't send encrypted messages to random users

2017-05-29 Thread listo factor via Gnupg-users 

This I find surprising: if one does not want receiving
encrypted messages from those that he does not have
existing relationship with, why does he publish his
public key on public keyservers?

___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Re: Don't send encrypted messages to random users to test your gpg

2017-05-29 Thread MFPA 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Hi


On Monday 29 May 2017 at 2:18:18 PM, in
, Marcus
Brinkmann via Gnupg-users wrote:-


> For people who want to communicate with other people
> rather than bots,
> there is also this:

> https://www.reddit.com/r/GPGpractice/
> https://www.reddit.com/r/publickeyexchange/


And there is PGPNET 
which is an encrypted discussion group - members send messages signed
and encrypted to all the members). You subscribe by emailing
 and replying to the email yahoo
sends you (unless you want to join with a Yahoo ID). For new members,
Yahoo's group emails default to a heavily HTML-polluted format that
does not play nice with pgp-inline encrypted messages, but once you
have joined an email to  removes
this silliness.

- --
Best regards

MFPA  

Another person's secret is like another person's money:
you are not as careful with it as you are with your own
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
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=H+D/
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Re: Don't send encrypted messages to random users to test your gpg

2017-05-29 Thread Marcus Brinkmann via Gnupg-users 
For people who want to communicate with other people rather than bots,
there is also this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/GPGpractice/
https://www.reddit.com/r/publickeyexchange/

On 05/29/2017 01:00 PM, Duane Whitty wrote:
> Hi list,
> 
> When I checked my email this morning I had an encrypted message from
> someone I didn't know and had never heard of signed with a signature for
> which no public key was available.
> 
> When I saw the email with a subject "test, test, hello" (or something to
> that effect" I decided not to let Thunderbird/Enigmail process it but
> rather I copy and pasted the cypher text into a file and used the
> command line to look at it..
> 
> The message and relevant gpg output was:
> 
> "Subject: test, test - hello
> 
> hey, i hope you don't mind - I just wanted to test using GPG and I
> picked you at random."
> 
> gpg: Signature made Mon 29 May 2017 02:59:23 AM ADT
> gpg:using RSA key (deleting for email to list)
> gpg: Can't check signature: No public key"
> 
> To the person who sent me this my reply is that yes I do mind.  I tend
> to believe no harm is intended and I'm not terribly upset over it but I
> consider it to be bad Internet etiquette.  It would be only a little
> more acceptable if you had published your public key so that the
> signature you used to sign with could at least be verified.
> 
> Having hashed that out welcome to the community :-)
> 
> To test your setup try this link, https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en/
> I haven't used it myself but unless someone from the list knows why it
> shouldn't be used it should fine.
> 
> I also highly recommend reading https://www.gnupg.org/faq/gnupg-faq.html
> 
> The above links are just to get started.  Happy pgp'ing
> 
> Best Regards,
> Duane
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Gnupg-users mailing list
> Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
> http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
> 



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users

Don't send encrypted messages to random users to test your gpg

2017-05-29 Thread Duane Whitty 
Hi list,

When I checked my email this morning I had an encrypted message from
someone I didn't know and had never heard of signed with a signature for
which no public key was available.

When I saw the email with a subject "test, test, hello" (or something to
that effect" I decided not to let Thunderbird/Enigmail process it but
rather I copy and pasted the cypher text into a file and used the
command line to look at it..

The message and relevant gpg output was:

"Subject: test, test - hello

hey, i hope you don't mind - I just wanted to test using GPG and I
picked you at random."

gpg: Signature made Mon 29 May 2017 02:59:23 AM ADT
gpg:using RSA key (deleting for email to list)
gpg: Can't check signature: No public key"

To the person who sent me this my reply is that yes I do mind.  I tend
to believe no harm is intended and I'm not terribly upset over it but I
consider it to be bad Internet etiquette.  It would be only a little
more acceptable if you had published your public key so that the
signature you used to sign with could at least be verified.

Having hashed that out welcome to the community :-)

To test your setup try this link, https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en/
I haven't used it myself but unless someone from the list knows why it
shouldn't be used it should fine.

I also highly recommend reading https://www.gnupg.org/faq/gnupg-faq.html

The above links are just to get started.  Happy pgp'ing

Best Regards,
Duane

-- 
Duane Whitty
du...@nofroth.com



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users