1996-08-06 - Re: Integrating PGP 3.0 Library with INN

Header Data

From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: a75ab56c68657ece2bb0e23ab358cb85f14bbd1e22cc8567f870134d7b78ec08
Message ID: <X5Z8RD36w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Reply To: <199608052017.PAA09340@homeport.org>
UTC Datetime: 1996-08-06 06:38:46 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 14:38:46 +0800

Raw message

From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 14:38:46 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Integrating PGP 3.0 Library with INN
In-Reply-To: <199608052017.PAA09340@homeport.org>
Message-ID: <X5Z8RD36w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org> writes:

> Igor Chudov wrote:
>
> | Has anyone thought of integrating PGP 3.0 library with INN?
> |
> | I was thinking along the lines of having PGPMoose support built
> | right into INN: if an arriving article is posted to a moderated
> | newsgroup for which a PGP key is available in the INN's keyring,
> | INN verifies existence and correctness of a PGP signature.
>
>
> | If moderators choose short enough keys (512 bits for example), this
> | verification will not take any significant amount of CPU time.
>
> Its my experience that at full feed sites, there isn't enough cpu to
> do this.  A p-90 can get ovewhelmed pretty easily trying to keep up
> with the load.  Trying to look into the body of an article means at
> least a few hundred more ops per article.  You could do this on a leaf
> node.  However, you cut the reliability of the system by adding things
> to go wrong.  Better to have a scanner that checks specific moderated
> groups after INN has deposited the articles.

It's wasteful to run this checking at every Usenet node.

It would be more efficient to run PHPMoose checking at a few trusted sites
and have them issue NoCeMs for articles that fail the check.

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps





Thread