On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 08:29:15PM -0400, Peter Todd wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:26:55PM -0700, Mr. Bad wrote:
> > >>>>> "PT" == Peter Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > PT> On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 08:25:18PM +0000, Adrian Lopez wrote:
> > >> It seems like various people here would rather do away with
> > >> KSKs. I'd like these people to address how data submission
> > >> might be dealt with in lieu of public keyspace. How would
> > >> in-freenet key indices work without KSKs? How would things like
> > >> EOF be implemented if users aren't able to submit data under
> > >> public keys bearing a particular prefix?
> >
> > PT> You would give out the private key of a SSK for submissions.
> >
> > Well, that wouldn't really help, actually, if you think about it,
> > right? You could still do an HTL=1 attack on a well-known private key.
>
> But it would be no worse then a KSK system and the poster is just
> asking what would we use if we removed KSK's.
But the way to "remove KSKs" would be to allow overwriting of data by
Inserts with the same key. Basically removing the chimera of a "write
ones" from the signed keys, making an SSK with publicly known private key
(a situation completely isomorphic to a KSK) just as useless.
--
'DeCSS would be fine. Where is it?'
'Here,' Montag touched his head.
'Ah,' Granger smiled and nodded.
Oskar Sandberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
