From: Anthony D Ortenzi <ao27+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 94 13:35:16 PST
To: hughes@ah.com (Eric Hughes)
Subject: Re: Increasing the encrypted/unencrypted ratio (was Re: Insecurity of public key crypto #1 (reply to Mandl))
In-Reply-To: <9403021622.AA10519@ah.com>
Message-ID: <EhREMRy00iV4I9m6dF@andrew.cmu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Excerpts from internet.cypherpunks: 2-Mar-94 Increasing the
encrypted/un.. by Eric Hughes@ah.com 
> >The incentive for using the encrypted list, then? Simple --
> >          1. Increasing ones personal encrypted-to-unencrypted ratio
> >and
> >          2. The old chestnut -- delay the unencrypted list 24 hours.
>  
> I'll consider doing this after a whole bunch more stuff is developed,
> like checking for digital signatures on posts and delaying those
> without them.
>  
> We're now running majordomo for the list, so if these features get
> added to the standard majordomo distribution, we could more easily
> deploy them.  That's a hint, since I have higher priority things to
> work on.

Well, I know that this might be a bit of a "crazy" idea, but would the
best way to distribute an encrypted mailing list be to have a PGP setup
where there is a public key to the mailing list, and all recipients are
given copies of the secret key?  I know that it might be a bit stupid
from the security side, but if each person was using PGP, the secret key
would be PGP encrypted and sent with that person's public key, ensuring
that only subscribers would get it, and then using that secret key to
decrypt the messages as they are recieved?


Just wonderin'....
                                        Anthony