cryptoanarchy.wiki

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

1997-10-12 - Re: negative security aspects of GAK compliance

Header Data

From: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
To: aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk
Message Hash: 6d478c3dc21aa4cb72eb6f68ec5d3194a33093bd5d1c6a61f0cac3f052109561
Message ID: <199710121103.MAA01338@server.test.net>
Reply To: <199710120948.KAA00212@server.test.net>
UTC Datetime: 1997-10-12 13:08:55 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:08:55 +0800

Raw message

From: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:08:55 +0800
To: aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk
Subject: Re: negative security aspects of GAK compliance
In-Reply-To: <199710120948.KAA00212@server.test.net>
Message-ID: <199710121103.MAA01338@server.test.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk> wrote:
> As I have pointed corporate access to stored email can be acheived
> with similar amounts of snooping enforceability by having the PGP5.5
> mail client store to an escrowed communications key after decryption,
                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Typo: that should be "storage key".

> I would be interested to see anyone refute this security argument from
> a security point of view.

And I am very interested to hear arguments against the logic of that
message.

Adam
-- 
Now officially an EAR violation...
Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

Thread