From: "JEFF LICQUIA (CEI)" <JLICQUIA@mhc.uiuc.edu>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 94 13:50:09 PST
To: Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>
Subject: Term Emulators (was Re: public accounts / PGP / passphrases)
Message-ID: <MAILQUEUE-101.941202154810.352@mhc.uiuc.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> From:          Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>

> Derek wrote:
> 
> | It would be nice to integrate PGP into terminal emulators, too, like
> | kermit or seyon or red ryder or whatever, so that you could easily use
> | PGP locally to sign/encrypt things on the remote end.  Wishful
> | thinking, I guess...
> 
> 	I think terminal emulators are the wrong layer for PGP
> integration.  PGP support is needed in document editors and viewers,
> rather than in network layers.

I think you misunderstood.  I took Derek as saying that 'modem programs' 
(as in the Procomm/Crosstalk kind) should have PGP integration.  If 
these truly provided a full-featured network, then yes, the focus would 
need to be on the local editors/viewers we'd all use.  As it is, these 
programs only provide a narrow window into a far-off environment, with 
varying degrees of security.

As a positive proposal, I noticed Greg Broiles's posts with the scripts 
and came up with an idea.  Would it be possibly a step forward to write 
similar scripts to allow for local agency?  I envision two stages here:

1.  Scripts on the remote end substituting for your editor that actually 
run your editor, then ask (once you're done with the plaintext) whether 
you'd like to process the message locally.  If so, it would send the file 
via sz, wait for a Enter: press, then rz the file back, substituting the 
rz'd file for the original.  You'd still have to mess with files on the 
local end, though.

2.  Local control of the term emulator to automate the local agency part 
of the transaction.

> 	With direct ip connectivity becoming commonplace, we're seeing
> PGP integrated into mail & news tools, which is a great thing.  (There
> is also a use for encrypting networks, but I think it is different
> from the use for PGP, which is a document oriented system.)

True.  However, the plight of the poor user who must use dial-up to
connect is still one where all the agency must happen on the other end
of the wire.  I don't think these are going to go away any time soon,
and by the time they do, we'll probably all have moved on to some new
GeeWhizBang system developed commercially (my guess is it'll come out
about a year after the RSA patent expires... :-) and integrated via OLE4
into our Windows 5.2 messaging systems (whoops!  sorry, Tim, I meant via
AppleMindMeld into our System 9.3 messaging systems :-). 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBLt+VqDER5KvPRd0NAQG2JQQAk3dLJW+eoHxqJZbE8Ofcf/oNg7zOgrAJ
zjpKwmM6PNFMsvsiI84jBkENHBhaItIMtuPCh+RCR6lS7JVaoAIlLOJ3e+5Kb8uM
B9nrZ9BMzro275wjC1Ubmh2+hLtSVRVU0lqoGi7JiEv/fSWdlBCXdLqztiVsMvn5
fMBPqQY07o8=
=InPY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----