1997-09-15 - Re: Not key escrow, key recovery

Header Data

From: “snow” <snow@smoke.suba.com>
To: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Message Hash: a3f8ad0fed367bd31cbcbec7b61f7d484e943efc06471314f381ce0c86d3efa1
Message ID: <199709150213.VAA00520@smoke.suba.com>
Reply To: <199709121430.QAA16638@basement.replay.com>
UTC Datetime: 1997-09-15 02:32:05 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 15 Sep 1997 10:32:05 +0800

Raw message

From: "snow" <snow@smoke.suba.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 1997 10:32:05 +0800
To: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Subject: Re: Not key escrow, key recovery
In-Reply-To: <199709121430.QAA16638@basement.replay.com>
Message-ID: <199709150213.VAA00520@smoke.suba.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



>>It is quite probable that this has been said before.  In case it hasn't,
>>however, I feel compelled to point out that mandatory key escrow/recovery
>>could likely mean an economic disaster of unimaginable proportions.
> (Underpaid clerk steals secret keys, etc.)
> Wake up.  It's not key escrow, it's key recovery.  Every message will be
> encrypted with a LEAF (law enforcement access field).  This is an additional
> recipient who can decrypt the message.  No user or corporate secret
> keys are escrowed.  You're working with yesterday's scenario.

	Oh, great. So there will be a few hundred LEAKs (Law Enforcement 
Agency Keys) laying around on hard drives all over the country so these 
LEA's can decrypt the messages. Great. 






Thread