Return-Path: X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B95F431FAF for ; Sat, 5 Apr 2014 10:12:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hYeG0STiYTsg for ; Sat, 5 Apr 2014 10:12:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.xen14.node3324.gplhost.com (gitolite.debian.net [87.98.215.224]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB0FE431FAE for ; Sat, 5 Apr 2014 10:12:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from remotemail by mx.xen14.node3324.gplhost.com with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1WWU7M-0008LW-G8; Sat, 05 Apr 2014 17:10:56 +0000 Received: (nullmailer pid 13054 invoked by uid 1000); Sat, 05 Apr 2014 17:10:40 -0000 From: David Bremner To: john.wyzer@gmx.de, notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: Feature suggestion. Indexing encrypted mail? In-Reply-To: <86k3b3ybo6.fsf@someserver.somewhere> References: <86k3b3ybo6.fsf@someserver.somewhere> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.17+170~gf516b7c (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:10:40 -0300 Message-ID: <878urj1z3j.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Daniel Kahn Gillmor X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2014 17:12:46 -0000 john.wyzer@gmx.de writes: > Would it be possible to add the configurable option to also decrypt > encrypted messages on the fly while indexing to make them searchable, > too? > > That would be really great for people that consider gnupg mainly an > encryption for transport or have their complete hard drive encrypted... As far I understand an attacker could reconstruct the message from the index, so one question is whether the extra complexity in notmuch is worth the minimal extra security over decrypting on delivery and storing plaintext on the (presumably encrypted) disk. Of course decrypting on delivery may be inconvenient (or impossible). I have CCed the two people who have implemented most of the crypto related stuff in notmuch so they can comment. d