From 5f8439738c6cd67d4e7491e8a6f8a6d49d206bdc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mark Walters Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 22:06:13 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Re: Feature suggestion. Indexing encrypted mail? --- bf/67569216dfe3dadeb18ad93d1a2e036db9d04d | 131 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 131 insertions(+) create mode 100644 bf/67569216dfe3dadeb18ad93d1a2e036db9d04d diff --git a/bf/67569216dfe3dadeb18ad93d1a2e036db9d04d b/bf/67569216dfe3dadeb18ad93d1a2e036db9d04d new file mode 100644 index 000000000..dd916f5b7 --- /dev/null +++ b/bf/67569216dfe3dadeb18ad93d1a2e036db9d04d @@ -0,0 +1,131 @@ +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 2468E431FBC + for ; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 14:06:36 -0700 (PDT) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -1.098 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, + NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] 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 Pa8UFgxu0Qgb for ; + Mon, 7 Apr 2014 14:06:32 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from mail2.qmul.ac.uk (mail2.qmul.ac.uk [138.37.6.6]) + (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) + (No client certificate requested) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13DE2431FB6 + for ; Mon, 7 Apr 2014 14:06:32 -0700 (PDT) +Received: from smtp.qmul.ac.uk ([138.37.6.40]) + by mail2.qmul.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.71) + (envelope-from ) + id 1WXGkA-0000NS-7Q; Mon, 07 Apr 2014 22:06:16 +0100 +Received: from [138.37.84.75] (helo=localhost) + by smtp.qmul.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.71) + (envelope-from ) + id 1WXGk9-0003BB-Sh; Mon, 07 Apr 2014 22:06:13 +0100 +From: Mark Walters +To: Jeremy Nickurak , + Jameson Graef Rollins +Subject: Re: Feature suggestion. Indexing encrypted mail? +In-Reply-To: + +References: <86k3b3ybo6.fsf@someserver.somewhere> + <878urj1z3j.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> + <87txa7pp8z.fsf@servo.finestructure.net> + <20140406091516.GG26903@vilya.m0g.net> + <5341D252.90405@fifthhorseman.net> + <867g71y327.fsf@someserver.somewhere> + <87ob0dnndk.fsf@servo.finestructure.net> + +User-Agent: Notmuch/0.15.2+615~g78e3a93 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.4.1 + (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) +Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 22:06:13 +0100 +Message-ID: <87d2gsonne.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +X-Sender-Host-Address: 138.37.84.75 +X-QM-Geographic: According to ripencc, + this message was delivered by a machine in Britain (UK) (GB). +X-QM-SPAM-Info: Sender has good ham record. :) +X-QM-Body-MD5: 4a30019b1195bcf368810456a706d6b8 (of first 20000 bytes) +X-SpamAssassin-Score: 0.0 +X-SpamAssassin-SpamBar: / +X-SpamAssassin-Report: The QM spam filters have analysed this message to + determine if it is + spam. We require at least 5.0 points to mark a message as spam. + This message scored 0.0 points. Summary of the scoring: + * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail + provider * (markwalters1009[at]gmail.com) +X-QM-Scan-Virus: ClamAV says the message is clean +Cc: Notmuch Mailing List , + Daniel Kahn Gillmor , + 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: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 21:06:36 -0000 + + +On Mon, 07 Apr 2014, Jeremy Nickurak wrote: +> Nonetheess, if you can tell from the index that a given message contains +> the words "hotel" "wine" "wife" "secret" and "rendezvous", you can infer a +> *lot* about the contents of encrypted contents of the message. + +I think it is worse that that: I think (from what people said on irc +some time ago) that the index contains the word and the position of that +word so essentially the whole message can be reconstructed from the +index. + +Best wishes + +Mark + + + +> +> +> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Jameson Graef Rollins < +> jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote: +> +>> On Mon, Apr 07 2014, john.wyzer@gmx.de wrote: +>> >> confess i haven't been following closely), it wouldn't be much extra +>> >> effort for someone to implement a filter that strips encryption from the +>> >> message. (this might still have the problem mentioned above about also +>> >> stripping PGP/MIME signatures, but the signatures and the decrypted +>> >> message itself would remain intact so they could be shown directly by +>> >> notmuch show without trouble). +>> > +>> > I don't understand that. :-( +>> > This sounds as if the view of the message is not generated from the +>> > mail storage. Isn't the purpose of the index to find the appropriate +>> > message file and everything else is generated from that file? +>> +>> I think that's exactly what Daniel is saying: what's viewed comes from +>> the message directly, and not from the db. +>> +>> jamie. +>> +>> _______________________________________________ +>> notmuch mailing list +>> notmuch@notmuchmail.org +>> http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch +>> +>> +> _______________________________________________ +> notmuch mailing list +> notmuch@notmuchmail.org +> http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch -- 2.26.2