Re: Feature suggestion. Indexing encrypted mail?

diff --git a/ac/51009f85c02d0dd49ff1d86f3f50dada0ac1bc b/ac/51009f85c02d0dd49ff1d86f3f50dada0ac1bc
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..05e4749
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ac/51009f85c02d0dd49ff1d86f3f50dada0ac1bc
@@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
+Return-Path: <john.wyzer@gmx.de>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49487431FC0\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sat,  5 Apr 2014 12:08:51 -0700 (PDT)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: 0.001\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+       tests=[FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001]\r
+       autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+       by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+       with ESMTP id cOhhRZ4ZPrtA for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Sat,  5 Apr 2014 12:08:46 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21])\r
+       (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))\r
+       (No client certificate requested)\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43CA7431FAF\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sat,  5 Apr 2014 12:08:46 -0700 (PDT)\r
+Received: from localhost ([77.12.75.61]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with\r
+       ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MHLNn-1WkYDi1cqB-00E28X; Sat, 05 Apr 2014 21:03:21\r
+       +0200\r
+From: john.wyzer@gmx.de\r
+To: Jeremy Nickurak <not-much@trk.nickurak.ca>,\r
+       David Bremner <david@tethera.net>\r
+Subject: Re: Feature suggestion. Indexing encrypted mail?\r
+In-Reply-To:\r
+ <CA+eQo_3AFofQ3gSxvce2e_d5bbaT_e00zA30xeyOxbYCpQhsNA@mail.gmail.com>\r
+References: <86k3b3ybo6.fsf@someserver.somewhere>\r
+       <878urj1z3j.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca>\r
+       <CA+eQo_3AFofQ3gSxvce2e_d5bbaT_e00zA30xeyOxbYCpQhsNA@mail.gmail.com>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.17 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1\r
+       (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2014 21:03:04 +0200\r
+Message-ID: <86ha67y4yf.fsf@someserver.somewhere>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: text/plain\r
+X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:UDP3DQJ1j8rgyGGxu6kOUsUOKE+hUouKekpazcWt/RfFkKmgFgD\r
+       thuM+XstpKWyL5En+mBHu+s/kcXAQYk348Br0/mSiRvGAN21vOD9Xwz9h5S4bbuMT/jgZ8t\r
+       +2jgyNa6If+Cy6tFrXUyYWe0sT1yaAFJkj8aExb4eHTSnC8rDclXCSgrKIBB20pzK3E84vZ\r
+       PfncMu1YSVLJFBTnH4eRg==\r
+Cc: Notmuch Mailing List <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>,\r
+       Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@debian.org>\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+       <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2014 19:08:51 -0000\r
+\r
+Jeremy Nickurak <not-much@trk.nickurak.ca> writes:\r
+\r
+> Off the top of my head, you could have an encrypted index too, which you\r
+> can only search while able to decrypt. Certainly another level of\r
+> complexity.\r
+>\r
+\r
+But why add so much complexity? \r
+\r
+If a user decides that either transport security is enough or\r
+additionally the hard disk is encrypted (why store an encrypted index on\r
+an encrypted hard disk?), said user could just switch on an option in\r
+the notmuch configuration that causes notmuch to ask for the password\r
+before or while indexing new messages and to add decrypted messages to the\r
+normal index as well.\r
+\r
+\r
+The level of security would be up to the user by means of said\r
+configuration option and those that want the convenience of searching\r
+encrypted messages could have it.\r
+\r
+Personally I would argue that if an attacker has the means to access the\r
+content of my hard disk either via the network or physically, there is\r
+no difference between having whole disk encryption and storing an\r
+encrypted index...\r
+\r