cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1994-07-22 - Re: “Key Escrow” — the very idea

Header Data

From: Carl Ellison <cme@tis.com>
To: berzerk@xmission.xmission.com
Message Hash: 0a041c785e50e1699f01a81043759337c93334efb1631c99b709ebc3af848bf8
Message ID: <9407221816.AA24181@tis.com>
Reply To: <Pine.3.89.9407221006.A14286-0100000@xmission>
UTC Datetime: 1994-07-22 18:17:39 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 22 Jul 94 11:17:39 PDT

Raw message

From: Carl Ellison <cme@tis.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 94 11:17:39 PDT
To: berzerk@xmission.xmission.com
Subject: Re: "Key Escrow" --- the very idea
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9407221006.A14286-0100000@xmission>
Message-ID: <9407221816.AA24181@tis.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>Date: Fri, 22 Jul 1994 10:27:30 -0600 (MDT)
>From: Berzerk <berzerk@xmission.xmission.com>
>Subject: Re: "Key Escrow" --- the very idea

>On Fri, 22 Jul 1994, Carl Ellison wrote:
>> if you really want to propose an escrow system we can live with,
>> I would demand that it include:
>> 1.	unambiguous ID of the person being tapped in the LEAF-equivalent
>WHAT!
>
>Why in the hell would you want to do that.  Just identify the piece of 
>equipment that is sending it.  Let the wiretap guys sort throught it like 
>they do now.

1.	I'm not a fan of key registration

2.	If it were forced down my throat, I want to make sure that
	the escrow agents can form a list of people being tapped so that
	they can detect abuses and possibly notify those tapped that
	they've been compromised.  They can't do that without either an
	ID of the equipment owner or some communciations/routing path
	which can map from equipment ID to my addr/phone/e-mail (to
	notify me).

	In other words, I want to see this hypothetical escrow agent
	(or one of the many) as someone protecting my rights against the
	interests of a tapping agency.

 - Carl

Thread