(Nod to the rest of what you said) On 03/25/2012 11:45 AM, Benjamin Kreuter wrote:
The US government still wants a system where encrypted communications can be arbitrarily decrypted, they just dress up the argument and avoid using dirty words like "key escrow."
Aside from the deep moral and constitutional problems it poses, does anyone think the US Govt could have that even from a practical perspective? * Some of the largest supercomputers in the world are botnets or are held by strategic competitor countries. This precludes the old key shortening trick. * The Sony PS3 and HDMI cases show just how hard it can be to keep a master key secure sometimes. Master keys could be quite well protected, but from a policy perspective it's still a gamble that something won't go wrong which compromises everyone's real security (cause a public scandal, expose industrial secrets, etc.). * Am I correct in thinking that computing additional trapdoor functions to enable USG/TLA/LEA decryption is not free? Mobile devices are becoming the primary computing devices for many. People may be willing to pay XX% in taxes, but nobody wants to pay a decrease in performance and battery life to enable such a misfeature. - Marsh _______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE