cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1996-03-02 - Re: A brief comparison of email encryption protocols

Header Data

From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@piermont.com>
To: Alex Strasheim <cp@proust.suba.com>
Message Hash: d355cbddf429279c0caaa4179338e03486e54c46c20f1ecd9a1b5951c1974e01
Message ID: <199603011621.LAA21143@jekyll.piermont.com>
Reply To: <199603010154.TAA05515@proust.suba.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-03-02 00:05:38 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 08:05:38 +0800

Raw message

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 08:05:38 +0800
To: Alex Strasheim <cp@proust.suba.com>
Subject: Re: A brief comparison of email encryption protocols
In-Reply-To: <199603010154.TAA05515@proust.suba.com>
Message-ID: <199603011621.LAA21143@jekyll.piermont.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Alex Strasheim writes:
> Sorry for the stupid questions, but I want to make sure I'm on the same 
> page as the rest of you.  Correct me where I'm wrong --
> 
> The idea to have a distributed database (like DNS?) that allows you to
> retrieve keys with query strings similar to urls.  So if you wanted to do
> a secure telnet to host.foobar.com, you'd submit something like
> "telnet://host.foobar.com" to the key server, and it would give you back a
> key.  If you wanted to send mail to me, you'd submit something like 
> "mailto://alex@suba.com".  Etc.

That wasn't actually what I had in mind. When I said a new URL I meant
something like key://foo.bar.com/bleh/blah/foo, to go with the new key
server protocol.

I'm not exactly sure what the key servers should take as lookup values
-- that is, at this point, a matter for discussion.

> Finally, does anyone know if anything's been happening with Matt's key
> management project? 

Matt does, I presume...

Perry

Thread