Subject: RE: Palladium (TCP/MS)

From: Franck Martin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:14:37 +1200

"Here is my preferred solution for Internet security. We could implement
a secure user identity system precisely like telephone Caller ID. It
would be essentially an Internet ID. All Internet transactions could be
based on it. Anyone who sends me e-mail can be identified. Anything I
send can be traced to me. People wouldn't be forced to participate, but
if they remain anonymous, I might choose to block them. I certainly
wouldn't accept file attachments from them. I know you hate this idea,
but I think the Internet needs a fingerprint. It does not have to have
personal information, but if you break the law it can be traced to you.
You can choose not to have a fingerprint, but then your ability to
communicate with others may be limited -- a price many people may choose
to pay. "

What i "quickly" read is that the author of the article is looking for a
system that put an ID on the sender of e-mails. This solution exists, it
is called S/MIME. Unfortunately, it is not widely used and poorly
implemented at a global level (unlike DNS). Also deploying digital
signature is only possible at company level, because nobody trustworthy
issues you a certificate that allows you to sign certificates.
 
The ISOC WG on PKI may help, see also the thread on Global PKI on DNS on
tht IETF list to find out the extent of the problem.
 
But it is not the first time I hear people wanting to digitaly certify
e-mails, personnal e-mails ,or commercial e-mails from respectable
companies (cf SPAM meeting before INET2002).
 
Cheers.
BTW I digitally signed this message, to make you understand some of the
problems of implemeting S/MIME.

Franck Martin
Network and Database Development Officer
SOPAC South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission
Fiji
E-mail:  <mailto:[email-masked]> [email-masked]
Web site:  <http://www.sopac.org/> http://www.sopac.org/
Support FMaps:  <http://fmaps.sourceforge.net/>
http://fmaps.sourceforge.net/
Certificate: https://www.sopac.org/ssl/ <https://www.sopac.org/ssl/>  

This e-mail is intended for its addresses only. Do not forward this
e-mail without approval. The views expressed in this e-mail may not be
necessarily the views of SOPAC.

-----Original Message-----
From: TOMSON ERIC [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, 22 October 2002 1:09 
To: [email-masked]'
Cc: [email-masked]'
Subject: Palladium (TCP/MS)

Please read the 2 following links, then answer 2 simple questions :
- Is Palladium (TCP/MS) a real/serious threat?
- Do we have to be afraid of it?
 
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20010802.html
<http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20010802.html> 
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20020627.html
<http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20020627.html> 
 
E.T.

---

From: Franck Martin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 11:14:37 +1200

Cheers.

Franck Martin

-----Original Message-----
From: TOMSON ERIC [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, 22 October 2002 1:09 
To: [email-masked]'
Cc: [email-masked]'
Subject: Palladium (TCP/MS)

 
E.T.

---

From: Cirillo CWO2 Michael R <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 20:27:07 -0400

MS promises S/MIME support in their next release, which would be Dec or Mar
or Jun or...  Currently, Outlook Web Access doesn't "know" S/MIME, so
certificate use is not possible.  It is possible to read a signed email and
to retrieve the attachment, but it requires Notepad or reconfig of the app
to which the PKCS #7 is associated.  Not hard.  Encrypted emails are
unreadable period. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Franck Martin
To: 'Gary Lawrence Murphy'
Cc: 'TOMSON ERIC'; [email-masked]'; [email-masked]'
Sent: 10/24/02 7:31 PM
Subject: RE: [isdf] RE: Palladium (TCP/MS)

This is called PGP and S/MIME. Both are valid IETF RFC.

From an industry point of view, S/MIME seems to be the one that will
survive in the long run, because it is implemented in nearly all mail
clients and follows the certificates used in SSL/TLS which is widely adopted
(IPSec to name only one).

However, none of them is widely implemented for e-mail purposes because
of problems to build a global PKI (in short). I still haven't found a
company that will give/sell me a certificate that allows me to sign my
organisational e-mails certificates. ISOC is working on it...

Cheers.

> From: Gary Lawrence Murphy [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Friday, 25 October 2002 11:19 
> To: Franck Martin
> Cc: 'TOMSON ERIC'; [email-masked]'; [email-masked]'
> Subject: Re: [isdf] RE: Palladium (TCP/MS)

> Isn't that PGP?

---

From: TOMSON ERIC <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 10:52:41 +0200

As this thread is becoming more and more technical, may I suggest to limit it from now on to the IETF list and then to stop cc:ing the ISDF list...

-----Original Message-----
From: Franck Martin [mailto:[email-masked]]

I agree with you, I found many more applications that do not support s/mime cf SSL-Certificates HOWTO on www.tldp.org <http://www.tldp.org> .

However, you can sign messages in s/mime clear text, which works the same as PGP by encapsulating the message in clear inside a signature... but some systems will still not be able to handle properly this mime signature...

Note that you can set your exchange server to convert s/mime messages automatically... On my exchange 5.5 in the Internet connector there is an option that says clients support s/mime. If it is enabled, the s/mime message is send as it to the client, if it is not enabled then the signature is removed (but the user does not know he has received a signed message).

s/mime still need more work, on the implementation level...

We are in chicken-egg situation, that will be solved with a global PKI (my opinion)...

Cheers.

 ----Original Message-----
From: Cirillo CWO2 Michael R [mailto:[email-masked]]

MS promises S/MIME support in their next release, which would be Dec or Mar or Jun or...  Currently, Outlook Web Access doesn't "know" S/MIME, so certificate use is not possible.  It is possible to read a signed email and to retrieve the attachment, but it requires Notepad or reconfig of the app to which the PKCS #7 is associated.  Not hard.  Encrypted emails are unreadable period.

---

From: Franck Martin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 10:21:35 +1200

And there is the mondo(?) project at ximian.com. Having .net running on
linux all in opensource.

Cheers.

> From: Lloyd Wood [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, 30 October 2002 9:29 
> To: Christopher Evans
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: RE: Palladium (TCP/MS)
> 
> 
> On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Christopher Evans wrote:
> 
> > .net is a suite of coding & publishing tools.  maybe should throw
> > together a .org suite of freeware coding tools?
> 
> what, like www.gnu.org? www.fsf.org?
> 
> where have you been?
> 
> L.
> 
> <http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/><[email-masked]>
>