cryptoanarchy.wiki

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

1997-06-10 - Re: Access to Storage and Communication Keys

Header Data

From: Phil Helms <phil@cccs.cccoes.edu>
To: Bill Stewart <stewarts@ix.netcom.com>
Message Hash: 676e8a9196ee068d8939cb63f195640131f7c011769d3cb1b9cacad2b39f6e0f
Message ID: <Pine.PMDF.3.95.970610115750.618690139C-100000@cccs.cccoes.edu>
Reply To: <3.0.1.32.19970610090503.00747630@popd.ix.netcom.com>
UTC Datetime: 1997-06-10 18:26:40 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 02:26:40 +0800

Raw message

From: Phil Helms <phil@cccs.cccoes.edu>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 02:26:40 +0800
To: Bill Stewart <stewarts@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Access to Storage and Communication Keys
In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970610090503.00747630@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.PMDF.3.95.970610115750.618690139C-100000@cccs.cccoes.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On Tue, 10 Jun 1997, Bill Stewart wrote:

> and you have potentially decent business reasons for backup
> of storage keys, but that's only the case if you're not using
> a sufficiently flexible cryptosystem and are using key backup
> instead of data backup, which is really the preferred approach anyway.)

I could envision situations where you wouldn't want to backup plaintext,
but only ciphertext.  In those situations, key backup would also be
necessary.  This would require the use of passphrases or some other
tokens to utilize the backed up keys.

 --
 Phil Helms                                  Internet: phil@cccs.cccoes.edu
 Community College Computer Services                    Phone: 303/595-1524
 Denver, Colorado                                         FAX: 303/620-4697

Thread