Re: Netscpae & Fortezza (Or, say it Ain't so, Jeff?)
I for one am against any kind of GAK on moral grounds. I also think that trying to implement mandatory GAK in a software only system would be a nightmare.
Unfortunately, it's quite simple, if your only intent is to get the keys, and not to use it as a way to increase NSA leverage... Carl Ellison's web page points out the simple version of this, and it's easy to extend to make it more reliable. 1) Have the NSA/NIST/DEA/etc. generate public keys for their GAK agents. 2) Have each session-key-transfer encrypt a copy of the session key with the public key of the GAK agent, and send it at the beginning of the connection. 3) To make it more robust, have the recipient of the session key also encrypt the session key with the GAK key and send it back, so that a conformist receiver can rat the key even if the sender didn't. (takes a little protocol support to make sure the sender doesn't mind getting it echoed back to her.) Unlike Steven Walker's fancy complex method (which Dorothy liked a lot), this is simple and straightforward, and requires no validation by the recipient. (Both parties could send fakes, but they could do that anyway.) What it doesn't do is allow third parties to detect whether the GAK field has the real session key in it or a fake, but c'est la guerre. You can even get fancier and support M-of-N splitting, requiring M of N GAK agents to give out their keyparts; just do the split and encrypt each piece with the corresponding GAK agent's public key. This also works in a wide variety of environments (e.g. Diffie-Hellman). You could also scrounge a few bits by using the GAK field as an IV if you need one. #--- # Bill Stewart, Freelance Information Architect, stewarts@ix.netcom.com # Phone +1-510-247-0664 Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281 #---
I for one am against any kind of GAK on moral grounds. I also think that trying to implement mandatory GAK in a software only system would be a nightmare.
If people care to look at my very old Shen work they will see a key escrow facility. This was installed becase as a network administrator at a sensitive site. I'm a big fan of key escrow. I just don't think I should be forced to use it on a public network by a government. I need the ability to secure internal channels inside certain sites however. I don't think I want the Whitehouse running with each staffer providing their own personal encryption system. Phill.
participants (2)
-
Bill Stewart -
hallam@w3.org