Re: Proof of email ownership
Hi! Let me note that I am currently working on a simplified key validation scheme. The basic idea is to connect a signature to an DNS entry. Our assumption is that DNS is secure and unforgeable - as of now it is not but eventually DNSSEC will get deployed to solve this and many other problems. Here is how it works: To create a signature on an email (or any other data) you would use: gpg -s [EMAIL PROTECTED]@example.org foo (add other options as you see fit). Now when someone wants to verify the signature he does it using the usual gpg --verify foo.gpg gpg detects that foo.gpg has the notation key [EMAIL PROTECTED] and takes its value ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) to run a DNS query like: $ host -t txt werner._pka.example.org werner._pka.example.org text "v=pka1\;fpr=A4D94E92B0986AB5EE9DC\ D755DE249965B0358A2\;uri=finger:[EMAIL PROTECTED]" Now it compares the fingerprint given in that Text record against the one of the public key used to verify the signature. If they match, it has been proved that the mail address [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a legitimate address in the domain example.org. If not, someone tried to use a faked key. As of now we use the outcome of this test to change the validity status of the key either to FULL or to NEVER (if they don't match). A MUA - or an MTA - may now display the verified address [EMAIL PROTECTED] to the user and compare it to the From address. Will will likely add ptions to gpg to make this easier. As a bonus we also put the URI part into the TXT record to allow the specification of a keyserver or whatever to retrieve the public key. gpg uses this during signature verification as well when collecting the recipients of a message; i.e. if you use "-r [EMAIL PROTECTED]" it would try to locate a PKA record for joe (joe._pka.example.org) and use this for key validation as well as to retrieve the key for joe. If you want to play with this feature, you need to build the latest Subversion of gpg and put keyserver-options auto-pka-retrieve into your gpg.conf. For real PKA records, replace example.org by fsfe.org. If this all works out well, we might want to apply for a dedicated DNS record type instead of using TXT. The scheme may also be used for S/MIME. Shalom-Salam, Werner ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: Save signature in mail headers
On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 23:43:00 +0200, David Srbecky said: > I would like to sign all my mail, but I do not want to annoy people that > have incompatible e-mail clients with extra attachment file or signature > in the text of the message. There are at least three reasons against this: 1. It is hard to get these header signatures right. That newly prposed DKIM has almost immediatly been broken due to design problems in white space processing. 2. You can't stream the data. The header of a mail is comes before the signature has been calculated. One of the things OpenPGP fixed (compared to PGP 2) is that it allows to stream data of arbitary length. No need for temporary files. 3. It is not needed MIME (S/MIME or PGP/MIME) are established and well matured protocols. IF you want to sign the actual headers of a message, simply encapsulate the entire message into an rfc822 container and you are done. Salam-Shalom, Werner ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: Proof of email ownership
How would this work out for people who do not have control over the DNS record of domains? Best examples are free email services like hotmail and gmail? -SK --- Werner Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi! > > Let me note that I am currently working on a > simplified key validation > scheme. The basic idea is to connect a signature to > an DNS entry. > > Our assumption is that DNS is secure and unforgeable > - as of now it is > not but eventually DNSSEC will get deployed to solve > this and many other > problems. > > Here is how it works: > > To create a signature on an email (or any other > data) you would use: > > gpg -s [EMAIL PROTECTED]@example.org > foo > > (add other options as you see fit). Now when someone > wants to verify > the signature he does it using the usual > > gpg --verify foo.gpg > > gpg detects that foo.gpg has the notation key > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > and takes its value ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) to run a > DNS query like: > > $ host -t txt werner._pka.example.org > werner._pka.example.org text > "v=pka1\;fpr=A4D94E92B0986AB5EE9DC\ > D755DE249965B0358A2\;uri=finger:[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > Now it compares the fingerprint given in that Text > record against the > one of the public key used to verify the signature. > If they match, it > has been proved that the mail address > [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a > legitimate address in the domain example.org. If > not, someone tried > to use a faked key. As of now we use the outcome of > this test to > change the validity status of the key either to FULL > or to NEVER (if > they don't match). > > A MUA - or an MTA - may now display the verified > address > [EMAIL PROTECTED] to the user and compare it to the > From address. > Will will likely add ptions to gpg to make this > easier. > > As a bonus we also put the URI part into the TXT > record to allow the > specification of a keyserver or whatever to retrieve > the public key. > gpg uses this during signature verification as well > when collecting > the recipients of a message; i.e. if you use "-r > [EMAIL PROTECTED]" it > would try to locate a PKA record for joe > (joe._pka.example.org) and > use this for key validation as well as to retrieve > the key for joe. > > If you want to play with this feature, you need to > build the latest > Subversion of gpg and put > > keyserver-options auto-pka-retrieve > > into your gpg.conf. For real PKA records, replace > example.org by > fsfe.org. If this all works out well, we might want > to apply for a > dedicated DNS record type instead of using TXT. The > scheme may also be > used for S/MIME. > > > Shalom-Salam, > >Werner > > > ___ > Gnupg-users mailing list > Gnupg-users@gnupg.org > http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: Proof of email ownership
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Werner Koch wrote: > Hi! > > Let me note that I am currently working on a simplified key validation > scheme. The basic idea is to connect a signature to an DNS entry. > > Our assumption is that DNS is secure and unforgeable - as of now it is > not but eventually DNSSEC will get deployed to solve this and many other > problems. > Your other assumption is that everyone has continuous and unrestricted (no proxies, firewalls) internet access. I can't even get GPG to work with an authenticating proxy. Will GPG work with a localhost-based proxy even? - -- Alphax | /"\ Encrypted Email Preferred | \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613 |X Against HTML email & vCards http://tinyurl.com/cc9up| / \ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFC9h2W/RxM5Ph0xhMRA54oAJsH9RZ5GQ+U6M9I5rP5fryco3UojACdG07g ASZ2F7v3cCJ9A3V7n0MVmhA= =aBnl -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Feature request: Detect whether recipient has a public key
Related to: Save signature in mail headers Is it possible to send the signature in mail headers? Ok, I got other solution: I think it is safe to assume that if user has public key than he has compatible MUA or at least he will not mind being send signatures. What I want is option to try import recipients public key and sign the message only if one is found. David ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Feature request: Show Photo ID
Hello, How difficult is it to show Photo ID if available? See http://tecwizards.de/mozilla/messagefaces/header-example.png David ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Feature request: Automatically import public keys
Hello, Enigmail is great, but I find that public key import is very repetitive and unnecessary action. Could Enigmail just try to import public keys automatically for incoming mail? David ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Feature request: Import public keys for all contacts in the address book
This could be especially useful for new users. (Like me :-) ) David ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Feature request: Show whether e-mail of user is verified
Related to: Proof of email ownership There are a few robots that verify that user owns the e-mail. There are a many more UNTRUSTED IDs than TRUSTED in my list. If enigmail could specify whether the ID has been signed by robot, it would provide significantly more information. PS: A configurable list of trusted robots in the options panel may be needed. David ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Feature requests: SORRY!!! - WRONG maillist
I very sorry!! I had a very creative moment, but I did not realize that I am sending mails to the wrong maillist - I should stop using "Edit As New..." :-( Sorry!!! David ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
more than one message digest per signed message?
Is it possible to use more than one message digest when signing a message with GnuPG? gpg --digest MD5 --digest SHA512 --clearsign test.txt -> used digest SHA512 gpg --digest MD5,SHA512 --clearsign test.txt -> gpg: selected digest algorithm is invalid gpg --digest "MD5 SHA512" --clearsign test.txt -> gpg: selected digest algorithm is invalid Thomas ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
Re: Proof of email ownership
Werner Koch wrote: > gpg -s [EMAIL PROTECTED]@example.org foo This parts looks good... > gpg detects that foo.gpg has the notation key pka-address at gnupg.org > and takes its value (werner at example.org) to run a DNS query like: > > $ host -t txt werner._pka.example.org > werner._pka.example.org text "v=pka1\;fpr=A4D94E92B0986AB5EE9DC\ > D755DE249965B0358A2\;uri=finger:[EMAIL PROTECTED]" This will never be accepted by the IETF because: - DNS is not a directory for random information - Don't overload TXT records (though you can go the SPF way and just make a record called SPF which is a TXT) I've been thinking about the above quite a bit and I would actually want to solve it somewhat similar but a bit different. What about a DNS RR that looks like; example.org PGPSRV https keyserver.example.net /pks/ PGPSRV hkp keyserver.example.net These two records basically are the same as specifying: keyserver https://keyserver.example.net/pks/ keyserver hkp://keyserver.example.net in the gpg.conf This thus allows one to specify the keyserver location for that domain, which one could point to pgp.mit.edu too if wanted. Another approach would be DNS-SD, but they don't allow multiple protocols at the moment. Which is why I brought up: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-massar-dnsop-service-00.txt but the folks tripped heavily over the word anycast there, I should have avoided that part. A simple: _pka.example.org TXT "https://keyserver.example.net/pks/"; also does the trick, but we need a standard for this. Btw I specified https above, which is something I would really like to see implemented and usable in gpg. This allows everybody, who has access to their DNS that is, to specify a keyserver of their choice for that domain. The HTTPS, which implies SSL, makes it able for gnupg to have a secure transfer of this data and verification of the SSL certificate to know that you are really talking to the correct host in the first place. (DNSSEC might then also be nice to have, but we'll have to wait a bit for that to be deployed everywhere...) $ dig _pgpkey._service.unfix.org any _pgpkey._service.unfix.org. 3600 IN PTR _pgpkey-http._tcp.unfix.org. _pgpkey._service.unfix.org. 3600 IN PTR _pgpkey-https._tcp.unfix.org. $ dig _pgpkey-https._tcp.unfix.org. any _pgpkey-https._tcp.unfix.org. 3600 IN TXT "path=/pks/" _pgpkey-https._tcp.unfix.org. 3600 IN SRV 13 100 443 purgatory.unfix.org. As to a note from somebody else "what about domains that people don't have access to and thus can't configure the above". One might make an extra uid, to a domain that does support the above trick, the key can then also be automatically fetched. eg: gpg -s [EMAIL PROTECTED]@example.org foo while you send the mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] example.com doesn't have a keyserver, example.org has. [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a (sub)key, but both keys are in the same set. Another note is that this all indeed still does not imply any trust, that needs to come from a lot of users signing your key, one way to solve it would be to have the domain admin have a trusted key, thus someone who has been verified, and have this key sign the keys in that domain, could even been done semi-automatically, this way the user key becomes quite trusted too. This might be good for larger installation. Greets, Jeroen signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
new (2005-08-07) keyanalyze results (+sigcheck)
New keyanalyze results are available at: http://keyserver.kjsl.com/~jharris/ka/2005-08-07/ Signatures are now being checked using keyanalyze+sigcheck: http://dtype.org/~aaronl/ Earlier reports are also available, for comparison: http://keyserver.kjsl.com/~jharris/ka/ Even earlier monthly reports are at: http://dtype.org/keyanalyze/ SHA-1 hashes and sizes for all the "permanent" files: c9db9fb5ae2a12b51117f88f336e84328d416ec712780540preprocess.keys a814d9123939d8ce0af57042f2eb1cdfb2c0d3787853497 othersets.txt 458bf5044e7fbb9c04d77438f2cf7be547d114cf3166352 msd-sorted.txt a751f9d5477744a4f5e5ce6ebad6a60908e317ee1372index.html e20d68915125e87089e903e63b721b0ef489c5cf2291keyring_stats bb00cce3adb3f8095ae520594e025610f215a4d91244821 msd-sorted.txt.bz2 d976cf98445763f7005cc5f2b325bf0be076b2a926 other.txt 90b51068bd02c52e4d838c6c3848674663800a161691008 othersets.txt.bz2 0d1785606c37bba7fdc9e936b277bd0b11cbccda5170981 preprocess.keys.bz2 2c52fded2c8f638632de37b8b496e4f1c38594f912880 status.txt 4c91c78209189374e972be114cff9e20f78cf978210266 top1000table.html 8d4bffb3742a167614fb6086a36c366e73ec5fdd30261 top1000table.html.gz 56eef4a6a68dcd62cb6735d11f186d60f509b42a10846 top50table.html b352fe275772434c4750d54719d29ff8e3535f7c2534D3/D39DA0E3 -- Jason Harris | NIC: JH329, PGP: This _is_ PGP-signed, isn't it? [EMAIL PROTECTED] _|_ web: http://keyserver.kjsl.com/~jharris/ Got photons? (TM), (C) 2004 pgp5JLsurTL74.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
