Dev/OpenPGP Signed Website
OpenPGP Signed Website
Has been requested in the forum. Having an OpenPGP Signed Website would be desirable. But that would require a software, which does not exist yet.
PGPHTML also wouldn't work as a complete solution.
- Users most likely won't copy and paste the text, so this would also require a browser or browser addon automating the verification.
- Adversaries in position to modify website content can always mount a rollback or indefinite freeze attacks (see  for definitions of those attacks). I.e. could pick an old message/website, which was signed years ago and now contains insecure/outdated information without the user being informed about the attack. To prevent that, the client application would have to check a field similar to Valid-Until field.
- The website structure or link would have to be signed and verified as well.
- Should pass the TUF threat model.
While relying on the OpenPGP web of trust, and not the SSL cartel, this could provide strong verification. On the other hand, it probably couldn't provide end-to-end encryption, SSL or .onion would be required for that.
It is an interesting idea, but outside the scope of Kicksecure ™ to invent such a solution.
- Patrick Schleizer mailed
licensing at fsf dot org(name redacted). PGPHTML is probably not Free Software. If that were the case, it wouldn't be usable for Kicksecure ™. Adrelanos also mailed the author, but there was no response.
> Is the following license Free Software? > Is it GPL compatible? > homepage: http://www.sanface.com/pgphtml.html > source tarball: http://www.sanface.com/pgphtml.tar.gz > License text: >> # pgphtml -- a perl script to make PGP signed web-pages >> # >> # by SANFACE Software <email@example.com> 19 June 2002 >> # >> # Requires the PGP or GPG >> # GPG support added by John Arundel <firstname.lastname@example.org> >> # >> # Copy, use, and redistribute freely, but don't take my name off it and >> # clearly mark an altered version. Fixes and enhancements cheerfully >> # accepted. >> # >> # This is version 4.1. The license doesn't explicitly permit modifications, nor distribution for a fee (even the relatively terse Expat license, sometimes ambiguously referred to as the MIT License, explicitly states that you have: "... without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, ...") It also states that "fixes ... accepted" in the same block as the license text, so it is unclear if that is a part of the license or a friendly request. I can't speak to what was the author's intent when writing the license; It is not my place to say "oh, the author of the license probably meant..." Therefore I would recommend contacting the author before using the software and asking for a copy of the software under a well known free software license.