Subject: [Trans] end to end email encryption using CT gossip protocol

From: Paul Wouters <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 11:16:01 -0400 (EDT)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 11:15:38
From: Paul Wouters <[email-masked]>
To: Trans <[email-masked]>
Subject: end to end email encryption using CT gossip protocol

FYI

https://code.google.com/p/end-to-end/wiki/KeyDistribution

 	For End-To-End, our current approach to key distribution, is to use a
 	model similar to Certificate Transparency, and use the email messages
 	themselves as a gossip protocol, which allow the users themselves to
 	keep the centralized authorities honest. This approach allows users to
 	not have to know about keys, but at the same time, be able to make sure
 	that the servers involved aren't doing anything malicious behind the
 	users' back.

 	To allow the system to be easily distributed (across multiple identity
 	providers), key servers can authenticate the user via existing 
federated
 	identity protocols (with OpenID Connect for example). The model of a 
key
 	server with a transparency backend is based on the premise that a user
 	is willing to trust the security of a centralized service, as long as 
it
 	is subject to public scrutiny, and that can be easily discovered if 
it's
 	compromised (so it is still possible to compromise the user's account,
 	but the user will be able to know that as soon as possible).

 	It's worth noting that End-to-End is still under active development, 
and
 	we might change our approach to key distribution if we find weaknesses
 	in this model, or if we find something else that is as easy to use, and
 	as likely to work. Part of the reason we release this document is to
 	seek early feedback from the community, and adapt as needed.

 	We also want to point out we will do our very best to continue to
 	support existing OpenPGP users who want to manually manage and verify
 	keys and fingerprints manually, as we understand that system has been
 	around for a long time, and has been more battle tested than what we 
are
 	proposing.