[dev] S/MIME again

[Cliff Green]

Quoting Mike Cochrane <mike@graftonhall.co.nz>:

> > ----- Message from green@UMDNJ.EDU ---------
> > Well, I haven't:
> > 1) hooked the ui to the library yet (signing is easiest, so I'll look
> >    there first)
> If you have problems with this, just email the list and i'll try sort it out.
Thanks!
 
> > 2) settled on a storage for correspondents' public keys (a separate table,
> >    or turba entries?), or
> use tubra as pgp does and jsut add a public key entry.
Okay.
 
> > 3) sketched out ldap searches for public keys not already in turba (okay,
> >    assume turba storage for now), and capturing them from signed mail
> are there repositories for s/mime keys? I haven't and don't actually use
> s/mime, i just wrote the code :-)
Normally, certs are acquired either by grabbing them from a correspondent's
signature, or from an ldap server.  Since we already have ldap capacity in
turba, it should just mean adding userCertificate (maybe userCertificate;binary)
to attributes.php and to the map array in sources.php for both ldap lookup and
personal addressbook import/lookup.


> > #1 is easiest (see attached), though #2 and #3 might offer something nicer,
> > aesthetically.  I'm going with easiest for now.
> I like the way you've done this, having them both in the same box is nice. I
> would like to see pgp with just two boxes like you've done with s/mime, much
> more compact. See what other people think about this though.
> 
> Probably needs to check that we're not s/mime and pgp signing/encrypting
> messages. or if messages are sent both s/mime and php encrypted they are
> separate multipart blocks, not one encrypting the output of the other.

Good point.  In most cases, I think people will be using one or the other, but I
also don't think we can rule out the possibility that someone will want to have
both available.  In that case, I think we should either make the sender choose
which technology they want to use for a given message (e.g., popup a small
window saying something to the effect of "I'm sorry, I can't do that Dave - pick
PGP or S/MIME for this message") or just prevent both from being selected at the
same time.  Otherwise, it just gets real messy, and you'd probably have to send
them as separate messages, not just separate blocks.  For example, I'm pretty
sure S/MIME would be greedy about wanting to create a message digest on the
entire message, not just the X509 part.

c
-- 
Cliff Green
Academic Computing Services - UMDNJ
Signature under NDA