protofan@motcid.UUCP (Mike S. Protofanousis) (11/27/90)
When I try to save a message which has been [encoded], the resulting file is not decoded. I believe elm should ask for the decryption key and then save the file! I wrote a program which works like crypt. It works around this 'bug'. -- uunet!motcid!protofan 708-632-6779
syd@DSI.COM (Syd Weinstein) (11/28/90)
protofan@motcid.UUCP (Mike S. Protofanousis) writes: >When I try to save a message which has been [encoded], the resulting >file is not decoded. >I believe elm should ask for the decryption key and then save >the file! This is really not a bug or a feature, but a problem, ie design issue that has no right or wrong answer. If the reason its being saved is to put it into a mail folder, then it should not be decoded. If it is being saved for its contents, then perhaps, yes. However, as we say in the monthly post, their are a lot of things that are not well discussed or implimented in endoded messages. Please review that. Dialog about how encoded messages are always welcome, code fixes are also welcome. -- ===================================================================== Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP Elm Coordinator Datacomp Systems, Inc. Voice: (215) 947-9900 syd@DSI.COM or dsinc!syd FAX: (215) 938-0235
phil@wubios.wustl.edu (J. Philip Miller) (11/28/90)
In article <4516@cocoa7.UUCP> protofan@motcid.UUCP (Mike S. Protofanousis) writes: >When I try to save a message which has been [encoded], the resulting >file is not decoded. > >I believe elm should ask for the decryption key and then save >the file! I strongly disagree with this. I do not want a plain text version of my message stored in my folder directory - if I want it encrypted, then I want all copies of it encrypted, not just during transmission. Would Mike also suggest that the sender's copy also exist as plain text in their outgoing folder? -phil -- J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067 Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110 phil@wubios.WUstl.edu - Internet (314) 362-3617 uunet!wuarchive!wubios!phil - UUCP (314)362-2693(FAX) C90562JM@WUVMD - bitnet
les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) (11/29/90)
In article <1990Nov28.024805.16530@wubios.wustl.edu> phil@wubios.wustl.edu (J. Philip Miller) writes: >>When I try to save a message which has been [encoded], the resulting >>file is not decoded. >>I believe elm should ask for the decryption key and then save >>the file! >I strongly disagree with this. I do not want a plain text version of my >message stored in my folder directory - if I want it encrypted, then I want >all copies of it encrypted, not just during transmission. My opinion is that the text belongs to you and you should be able to do anything you want with it. One of the common things to do with mail messages is to save them in non-folder files or pipe through other programs. An easy way to allow either choice would be to ask for the key and decrypt (only) if you give it. >Would Mike also suggest that the sender's copy also exist as plain text in >their outgoing folder? Again, it should be his choice what he does with it. As long as it is clear to the user what is going to happen, I have no problem with the software offering to leave the text in a usable form. Les Mikesell les@chinet.chi.il.us
meo@Dixie.Com (Miles ONeal) (11/29/90)
Not having looked at the source to this area, let's invite
me some flamage...
How about if, when saving a crypted message, it looks
at an elmrc variable to see whether to decrypt, not decrypt,
or prompt you as to which to do?
Good. You like it? Go do it.
Me? I'm with the guy who wanted all copies encrypted. Maybe
you simply don't trust the network, but I don't trust anybody
who can access my system.
Miles O'Neal
meo@dixie.com (S&SSi) {uunet | emory}!rsiatl!meo
meo@sware.com (work) {uunet | emory}!sware!meogulik@motcid.UUCP (Gregory Gulik) (11/30/90)
In article <1990Nov28.024805.16530@wubios.wustl.edu> phil@wubios.wustl.edu (J. Philip Miller) writes: > >I strongly disagree with this. I do not want a plain text version of my >message stored in my folder directory - if I want it encrypted, then I want >all copies of it encrypted, not just during transmission. > > >Would Mike also suggest that the sender's copy also exist as plain text in >their outgoing folder? There are many times I would want a feature like that. For example, if you are using UUCP, there are times when your mail will make several hops to get where it's going. Many times I would like to send a personal message to someone on a secure system, so I would like to encrypt the message on the way there to keep system administrators from reading it, but the person at the other end would be able to save it in plain text. If this feature is to be implemented, it should be similar to the way the Include Copy feature is done. There should be options in the elmrc for the default action, and a true/false option to specify if the user is to be prompted. Since I am the system administrator of my own system at home, I wouldn't need to keep mail encrypted there, so I would automatically save my mail decrypted. I already love elm, and this type of feature would make me love it even more!!!! -greg -- -- Gregory A. Gulik mcdchg!motcid!gulik || greg@gagme.chi.il.us || gulik@depaul.edu
slb@neptune.dsc.com (Steve Baur) (12/01/90)
gulik@motcid.UUCP (Gregory Gulik) writes: >For example, if you are using UUCP, there are times when your mail >will make several hops to get where it's going. Many times I would >like to send a personal message to someone on a secure system, so >I would like to encrypt the message on the way there to keep system >administrators from reading it, but the person at the other end would >be able to save it in plain text. O.K. That looks easy enough to implement. First off, add a new keyword like "[encode]", maybe "[autoencrypt#]". The '#' sign is a single digit. Now to use this feature you would negotiate a key with the person who is to receive this mail. He thens puts a line "encryptkey# = <key>" in his .elmrc. Adding the extra digit is so that you can use this feature with multiple destinations and be able to use different keys with each. Now when elm is reading such a message, it can strip out the "[autoencrypt#]" and the subsequent "[clear]" when reading the message, and thus the reader could never know that the message was encrypted during transit. >If this feature is to be implemented, it should be similar to the >way the Include Copy feature is done. There should be options >in the elmrc for the default action, and a true/false option to >specify if the user is to be prompted. That's easy enough. Add another flag: autoencryptflag (with states ON and OFF). I've worked with the elm encryption code, and I don't think doing something like this is a major effort. Anybody else interested? P.S. Now for a feature I'd really like to add: The current encryption code is buggy in that only lines surrounded by the "[encode]" "[clear]" can be encrypted. But what about certain of the e-mail headers? There is no way, for example to encrypt a Subject:. The idea would be to add the special header "X-Elm-Encrypted: X.Y" (with X.Y being the elm version number, that way if the encryption algorithm is changed in a future version, you know what version did the encrypting). When this header is detected, everything not absolutely required for RFC822 would be encrypted. Any takers? -- "Have you any idea how difficult it is to get a judge to sign a warrant based on information from a parrot?" - Detective Roger Coan Steve Baur (slb%neptune%dschub@hub.ucsb.edu)