RE: secure sign & encrypt

["Dominikus Scherkl" <Dominikus.Scherkl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi!

> > Your proposal for an extra packet does not address this alleged
flaw.
> > Note that Alice could sign a message saying "encrypted to 
> > Bob", and then
> > encrypt and send the message to Charlie, thus framing Bob for breach
> > of confidence.
> 
> No, because then Charlie would know it was something fishy going on.
> He would not now if Alice or Bob (or some one else) was to blame,
> but he would get a warning message saying that this is an invalid
> signed & encrypted message.
Hey, this is an attack at _Bob_ - Charlie don't needs to be nice!
The simple possibility of such attacks discredits the trust in beeing
the original receiver of a message, so we gain nothing!

Best Regards.
-- 
Dominikus Scherkl
dominikus.scherkl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx