1994-01-20 - Re: alternative to Fair Cryptosystems

Header Data

From: szabo@netcom.com (Nick Szabo)
To: cme@sw.stratus.com (Carl Ellison)
Message Hash: 01bd197910fe96bebdd54c73920c7a3147ee4e3133fda69ccc7b3f534e53269e
Message ID: <199401201704.JAA24508@mail.netcom.com>
Reply To: <199401201628.LAA02129@ellisun.sw.stratus.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-01-20 17:04:18 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 20 Jan 94 09:04:18 PST

Raw message

From: szabo@netcom.com (Nick Szabo)
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 94 09:04:18 PST
To: cme@sw.stratus.com (Carl Ellison)
Subject: Re: alternative to Fair Cryptosystems
In-Reply-To: <199401201628.LAA02129@ellisun.sw.stratus.com>
Message-ID: <199401201704.JAA24508@mail.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Carl Ellison:
> all the good little
> boys and girls who want to prove how obedient and conformist they are can
> include those [TLA] keys as recipients when they encrypt messages...what
> could be wrong with this?

Would the "boys and girls" with this choice be the users or the comm
equipment manufacturers?  If the users, the system would become that
much more user hostile (already a big barrier to common use of crypto).
If the manufacturers, the system would not be practically different from 
today's, where manufacturers are free to choose their encryption method 
but get leaned on by the government in various ways to use weak methods.

Nick Szabo					szabo@netcom.com




Thread