Hacker News Reader

I explained ways to avoid this. Write `secure` for the subject and include the actual subject in the encrypted message. Propose an RFC to include an encrypted subject in the headers. Encrypted the subject line. I don't think this is valid considering that there are solutions.

View on HN

When you're at the point of making excuses for important parts of the message text being revealed in plaintext, the useful debate about email encryption is basically over.

That is how email works. The subject isn't an important part of message text, the message is.

We agree about at least this much: this is, indeed, how email works.

What if instead of writing “secure” in the subject, I just don’t send the email and instead use Signal or WhatsApp where all the text is encrypted end to end?

It’s not clear why it’s desirable to keep bolting things onto email in an attempt to somehow make it eventually match the security profile that we can already get by just using other existing options.

In any sufficiently long discussion of PGP’s merits, it becomes obvious that those arguing for PGP are not motivated by a desire to keep communications confidential, but, rather, to justify use of PGP.

So, why not just use Signal or WhatsApp?

‘Cause they’re not PGP.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com