On Tue 2017-06-06 01:24:43 +0200, Stefan Claas wrote: > On 05.06.17 22:26, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >> what does "bullet-proof" mean, specifically? > > For me it means that the idendicons should be visually easy to read > and cryptographically secure. Sorry that i have no better explanation.
here's one way to try to frame the question: Imagine the situation as a game, where you have two players on one team, "defense" named Alice and Bob; Alice wants to send a message to Bob. Another player on the opposing team, "offense", is named Mallory, is trying to send a message to Bob as well, but trying to trick Bob into thinking that the incoming message comes from Alice. The way the game is played, either Alice or Mallory gets to send a message. Bob has to decide whether the message actually came from Alice. If Bob gets it right, the "defense" wins. If Bob gets it wrong, the "offense" wins. The game is played multiple times. Is that the scenario you're thinking of? If so, does the defense need to win 100% of the time over thousands of games? or is it acceptable for offense to win occasionally? In any case question is: how much work does Mallory need to do to get Bob to make a mistake? How frequently can Mallory trick Bob into accepting mail from her as though it were from Alice? Conversely, how many messages that were actually from Alice can Bob accidentally reject without making Alice upset enough to give up on the entire communications scheme? When you frame the problem this way, you can start thinking more concretely about what "bulletproof" means, and you can actually design user trials to test proposals. There are probably other ways to concretize the problem, this is just one that i've come up with. But without a concrete way to understand what we're looking for, words like "bullet proof" or "easy to read" or "cryptographically secure" are tough to get people to agree on. I suspect (as discussed upthread) that TOFU will have better metrics for "defense" at the game described above than any attempt that involves asking people to visually distinguish deterministically-generated identicons. But i don't know, because i haven't tested it. --dkg
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users