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