From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 08:24:57 +0800
To: JonWienke@aol.com
Subject: Re: So, what crypto legislation (if any) is necessary?
In-Reply-To: <960330120159_181484785@emout09.mail.aol.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960330141751.22592D-100000@polaris.mindport.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Sat, 30 Mar 1996 JonWienke@aol.com wrote:

> The concept of encrypting a key before escrowing it is excellent.  It
> prevents the escrow agent from misusing the key, and protects the principal
> from government snooping.  If the escrow agent is served a subpoena, he can
> say, "Here is the key you want. Go ahead and take it.  In fact, here is my
> entire key database.  All keys are encrypted by the principals before I get
> them, so I can't guarantee that you will be able to use them, but here they
> are anyway."  At this point, the LEO's can take whatever they want, but the
> principals are still safe.  The escrow agent doesn't have to send any
> encrypted "rosebud" message to anyone, and he can bend over backwards to make
> the LEO's happy, so his butt is covered, too.  At this point, the LEO's can
> either (a) send the keys to the NSA for decryption, and thereby admit that
> the gov't can break IDEA (or whatever cryptosystem was used to encrypt the
> keys before the escrow agent got them), (b) rubber hose the unencrypted
> key(s) from the principal, or (c) go home and pout.

(d) [which may be a subset of (b)] impose contempt sanctions on the 
principal until he releases the key to the key.

---
My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li
"In fact, had Bancroft not existed,       potestas scientiae in usu est
Franklin might have had to invent him."    in nihilum nil posse reverti
00B9289C28DC0E55  E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information