Re: my periodic rant on quantum crypto

2004-04-14 Thread David Honig
At 03:37 PM 4/12/04 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote:

QC can only run over a dedicated fiber over a short run, where more
normal mechanisms can work fine over any sort of medium -- copper, the
PSTN, the internet, etc, and can operate without distance limitation.


Nice essay.  I especially liked the discussion of authentication.

Its also the case AFAIK that the quantum-carrying fiber
can only carry one photon at a time.  (Perhaps you can multiplex
different frequencies, if your demultiplexor doesn't change the
quantum properties).  Now while there *is* a lot of dark fiber,
sending one photon at a time is a pretty good way to keep the
construction crews digging up roads :-) 

Similar quantum-hype is sometimes argued in RNG discussions
by those with very narrow views of what an RNG needs and
consists of.



-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Cryptonomicon.Net - Key Splitting : First (and Second) Person Key Escrow

2004-04-14 Thread R. A. Hettinga
http://www.cryptonomicon.net/modules.php?name=Newsfile=printsid=742


 Key Splitting : First (and Second) Person Key Escrow
Date: Monday, April 12 @ 08:00:00 EDT
Topic: Algorithms / Asymmetric Cipher



 One of our missions here at Cryptonomicon.Net is to advocate the use of
appropriate cryptographic technology. One technology that's sorely missed
in a number of commercial products is key splitting. Never heard of key
splitting? That's not surprising. A recent google search on 'key-split' and
'key-splitting' turned up about 6000 results, while a search on 'PKI'
returned over a million hits. 'Secret Sharing', the technical term,
produces a few more hits, but not nearly as many as 'PKI'.




 Key Splitting, sometimes inaccurately called First Person Escrow, is a
technique by which some secret string of bits (like you're web server's
private key) is split into two or more shares. The shares are
distributed to trusted individuals to hold safe until such time as they are
needed. In the event that your secret is destroyed (or more likely you
forget the PIN or password used to encrypt your web server's private key,)
the shares are recombined to recover the secret. Key Splitting is like an
insurance policy for your keys.

 There are more than a couple algorithms for creating key shares. Menezes,
et al.'s Handbook of Applied Cryptography presents the subject in a good
way. We especially like the Handbook of Applied Cryptography as a source,
as they provide a good deal of the math for math-minded implementors, but
also spend time discussing the development of ideas and algorithms. Readers
can also download sections of the HAC as .PDF's. Bruce Schneier's
perennial favorite Applied Cryptography also describes key splitting
algorithms, and for the less mathematically inclined has an expanded plain
English description.

 Why should you care about Key Splitting? With the growth of crypto-enabled
products: browsers, email clients, VPN clients, wireless access points, et
cetera; more and more people are using strong encryption to protect their
privacy or to establish their online identities. But in the rush to get
products out the door, sometimes product managers forget to support proper
key management techniques. While we've yet to see a product that gives out
it's private keys to anyone who asks, we have seen a number of products
where keys are encrypted under device master keys. What happens if you lose
the device master key? Well... the answer from the support people is don't
lose the master key! Some of these products have master keys derivable
from serial numbers and salt values. One product we've seen (and you know
who you are) derives it's device master key from it's serial number without
salting. An attacker wishing to steal the device's master key (and all of
the keys it protects) needs only to hash all possible serial numbers. As
there were less than 10,000 of these devices made, this is certainly a
tractable problem for an attacker.

 Key Splitting allows your IT staff to essentially back up the
cryptographic module protecting your sensitive secret and private keys. If
you're thinking that this sounds like it could be a security problem, then
give yourself a few extra points. Key Splitting systems should be used in
conjunction with a well defined IT process to protect the integrity of the
system. There are, fortunately, several examples of how to properly do key
splitting from a procedural point of view; your local CISSP should be able
to find a process that works for you as it's unlikely that any one process
will work for ALL environments.

 If you are in a position where you specify security features for your IT
infrastructure, surprise your sales rep by asking What key splitting
features does your product support? Give the supplier extra points if the
sales rep understands what you're asking.

 If you are a product manager, please add key splitting to the list of key
management features in your product. Security is playing a larger role in
modern IT systems, and customers are starting to add modern key management
features to their list of best common practices. By supporting your
customers' practices, you're only making your products more marketable.







 This article comes from Cryptonomicon.Net
http://www.cryptonomicon.net/

 The URL for this story is:
http://www.cryptonomicon.net//modules.php?name=Newsfile=articlesid=742

-- 
-
R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


DRM of the mirror universe

2004-04-14 Thread Jani Nurminen
Hello,

I had this idea about reversing the roles of the actors in a typical DRM
system, and thinking about where it might lead. I hope the idea will
stimulate some discussion: is the idea dead on arrival? Does it have
merit? Is it feasible? Is there something like this being built today?

Here goes... The main idea is this: the ordinary consumer (you or me)
becomes the content provider. The content provider (the corporation)
becomes the consumer. Thus, we have now reversed the roles.

But what content could the consumer-become-content-provider, the
ordinary person, you or me (let's call this actor the user), produce?
What could be interesting and rare for the corporation but found in
abundance from the user? One answer is personal data. 

Upon request by some corporation, the user decides to accept the
request. The user creates a DRM-protected file containing the personal
data the user wishes to reveal. When proper DRM technology is being used
(the same technology used to protect e.g. movies), the user can be sure
that the corporation is not able to 
  * use the personal data after the license period (e.g. 2 hours) has
expired
  * share the personal data with third party companies without
permission
  * do other non-authorized nasty stuff with the personal data 

Using the evil DRM technology a very good (good and evil is
subjective!) purpose can be achieved: the preservation of the user's
privacy. The user gets to decide who can receive and use the information
in the first place. The user can disallow use by companies the user
considers not to be trustworthy, or who he considers to be immoral, or
annoying, or who have the most idiotic advertisements. 

This kind of application of DRM would probably guarantee privacy of the
personal data of each individual person, while at the same time allow
companies access to that data with the consent of the user. To me this
seems like best of both worlds.

The role-reversal idea could help in achieving balance between the
concerns of the corporation and the concerns of the consumer, and
benefit all parties involved. At the very least, the idea can offer
possibilities for stimulating and interesting discussion. 

(Note: I wrote this originally as a blog article, and it's mostly copy +
paste from there with minor editing.. and some attitude removed :-) )

-- 
GPG 0x6EE92B3E - http://www.lut.fi/~jnurmine/



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Re: TCFS available for NetBSD-1.6.2

2004-04-14 Thread Ivan Krstic
VaX#n8 wrote:
I've done a survey of the various crypting file system tools, would anyone
be interested in a summary of available options?
This would likely be an interesting read for many on the list. Perhaps 
you can put up a PDF somewhere?

Cheers,
Ivan
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


AES suitable for protecting Top Secret information

2004-04-14 Thread Steve Bellovin
I haven't seen this mentioned on the list, so I thought I'd toss it 
out.  According to http://www.nstissc.gov/Assets/pdf/fact%20sheet.pdf ,
AES is acceptable for protecting Top Secret data.  Here's the crucial 
sentence:

   The design and strength of all key lengths of the AES algorithm
   (i.e., 128, 192 and 256) are sufficient to protect classified
   information up to the SECRET level. TOP SECRET information will
   require use of either the 192 or 256 key lengths.


--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb


-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Definitions of Security?

2004-04-14 Thread Thierry Moreau


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Hi,

I'm looking for interesting and unusal defitions of the
term Security (or secure).
I'm fully aware that it is difficult or impossible to give
a precise, compact, and universal definitions, and some
book authors explicitely say so. However, there are definitions
(or attempts to give those), and I'd be interested to compare
them. If you know of any definition that might be interesting
for any reason, please send me a link or citation. thanx
a well-informed sense of assurance that information risks and controls 
are in balance

From:
James M. Anderson, Why We Need a New Definition of Information Security, 
Computers  Security, vol 22, no. 4, May 2003, 2003, pages 308-313.

--

- Thierry Moreau

CONNOTECH Experts-conseils inc.
9130 Place de Montgolfier
Montreal, Qc
H2M 2A1
Tel.: (514)385-5691
Fax:  (514)385-5900
web site: http://www.connotech.com
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: DRM of the mirror universe

2004-04-14 Thread Paul A.S. Ward


Jani Nurminen wrote:

[...]
But what content could the consumer-become-content-provider, the
ordinary person, you or me (let's call this actor the user), produce?
What could be interesting and rare for the corporation but found in
abundance from the user? One answer is personal data. 

Upon request by some corporation, the user decides to accept the
request. The user creates a DRM-protected file containing the personal
data the user wishes to reveal. When proper DRM technology is being used
(the same technology used to protect e.g. movies), the user can be sure
that the corporation is not able to 
 * use the personal data after the license period (e.g. 2 hours) has
expired
 * share the personal data with third party companies without
permission
 * do other non-authorized nasty stuff with the personal data 

Using the evil DRM technology a very good (good and evil is
subjective!) purpose can be achieved: the preservation of the user's
privacy. 
 

Welcome to ACME.com.  In order to do business with ACME.com we require
that your personal data  be provided without restriction.  If you don't 
like that, no
problem.  Feel free to do business with others.

(Don't believe that?  Gee, how many websites require javascript, java, 
activeX?)

Paul

-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Definitions of Security?

2004-04-14 Thread Lars Eilebrecht
According to [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 I'm looking for interesting and unusal defitions of the
 term Security (or secure).

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security


ciao...
-- 
Lars Eilebrecht
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Definitions of Security?

2004-04-14 Thread Anne Lynn Wheeler
At 08:01 AM 4/14/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Hi,

I'm looking for interesting and unusal defitions of the
term Security (or secure)
there was a discussion on PAIN taxonomy for security earlier in the year 
... misc. references
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm17.htm#3 Non-repudiation (was RE: The PAIN 
mnemonic)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm17.htm#5 Non-repudiation (was RE: The PAIN 
mnemonic)



-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: DRM of the mirror universe

2004-04-14 Thread Barney Wolff
On Tue, Apr 13, 2004 at 11:05:10PM +0300, Jani Nurminen wrote:
 
 But what content could the consumer-become-content-provider, the
 ordinary person, you or me (let's call this actor the user), produce?
 What could be interesting and rare for the corporation but found in
 abundance from the user? One answer is personal data. 
 
 Upon request by some corporation, the user decides to accept the
 request. The user creates a DRM-protected file containing the personal
 data the user wishes to reveal. When proper DRM technology is being used
 (the same technology used to protect e.g. movies), the user can be sure
 that the corporation is not able to 
   * use the personal data after the license period (e.g. 2 hours) has
 expired
   * share the personal data with third party companies without
 permission
   * do other non-authorized nasty stuff with the personal data 

DRM only works because the supplier of the content has itself certified
the software used to process the content, or trusts the entity that
has certified the software.  Who would you trust to certify the software
that some corporation will use to process your personal data?

Another issue is that DRM works best to protect massive content.  For
example, whether you are HIV-positive is a single bit.  How would you
prevent me from capturing that bit from my screen with a camera?  If
the DRM prevents any association of your data with your identity, the
data will not be worth much to me.

Also, even assuming the DRM works, what prevents the user from presenting
false data?  The only data I can't lie about is what I generate as a
side-effect of something else, for example a click-stream.  But that's
already available reliably to the server(s) now, without DRM.

-- 
Barney Wolff http://www.databus.com/bwresume.pdf
I'm available by contract or FT, in the NYC metro area or via the 'Net.

-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: DRM of the mirror universe

2004-04-14 Thread David Wagner
Jani Nurminen  wrote:
I had this idea about reversing the roles of the actors in a typical DRM
system, and thinking about where it might lead.
[...]
This kind of application of DRM would probably guarantee privacy of the
personal data of each individual person, while at the same time allow
companies access to that data with the consent of the user.

This kind of idea has been discussed before.  Personally, I'm not
convinced we're likely to see this take off any time soon.  There are
some technological barriers, but a bigger one may well be incentives.
I'd argue the true source of many privacy problems may be more from the
imbalance in bargaining power between the consumer and the corporation
(the corporation can often more or less dictate terms -- or, at least,
there is not much room for personalized negotiation and bargaining).
Fixing the power imbalance may well be a precondition to deploying
technology-based privacy defenses (be it DRM, or anything else).

-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: AES suitable for protecting Top Secret information

2004-04-14 Thread Vin McLellan
I missed that announcement too -- but Wikipedia, the web-based Free 
Encyclopedia, caught it!  See Wikipedia on AES at: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AES

The Wikipedia module on AES Security has a link to the same NSA fact sheet 
Steve mentioned.

I was surprised.  I thought, as in so many other things, the NSA was going 
to say one thing and do another.

Suerte,
_Vin
At 4/14/2004, Steve Bellovin wrote:

I haven't seen this mentioned on the list, so I thought I'd toss it
out.  According to http://www.nstissc.gov/Assets/pdf/fact%20sheet.pdf ,
AES is acceptable for protecting Top Secret data.  Here's the crucial
sentence:
   The design and strength of all key lengths of the AES algorithm
   (i.e., 128, 192 and 256) are sufficient to protect classified
   information up to the SECRET level. TOP SECRET information will
   require use of either the 192 or 256 key lengths.
 ---
 Vin McLellan + The Privacy Guild + [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   22 Beacon St., Chelsea, MA 02150-2672 USA
-
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending unsubscribe cryptography to [EMAIL PROTECTED]