Sylvain Viart writes:
This question of distributing encrypted email to an unknown number of subscribers is quite interesting/dangerous in the point of view of securing the information.
True, but this is out of scope for this list. I'm not saying you shouldn't discuss here if you want to, just that from the point of view of the Mailman developers we are assuming that users have answers to (enough of) that set of questions, and we're merely interested in how much demand there is.
Could you describe the goal to achieve?
One goal that Mailman is interested in is chaining trust, via signatures. I think it's reasonable to suppose that if the original user is supposed to sign her post, and the list verifies and resigns, we might be able to convince some sites to whitelist those lists.
That would be worthwhile even if we never do really solve the issues of encrypted mailing lists. I'm not sure if there are any issues with encrypted lists that don't come up with signed lists (well, I guess there's the issue that signed lists are useful to users even if they don't use a PGP tool, but that's definitely out of scope for us).
Also I noticed that despite we are in 2014, using GPG is still quite "repulsing" for basic user…
Sure. There's obviously no hope of getting enough yahoos[1] to sign mail that Yahoo! will give up on "p=reject". ;-)
Footnotes: [1] http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/yahoo. Appropriate, eh? Note that Yahoo! almost certainly intends a different etymology....