On 18/08/10 3:46 AM, Peter Gutmann wrote: > Alexander Klimov <alser...@inbox.ru> writes: > >> Each real-time check reveals your interest in the check. What about privacy >> implications? > > (Have you ever seen a PKI or similar key-using design where anyone involved in > speccing or deploying it genuinely cares about privacy implications? Not only > have I never seen one, I've even been to a talk at a conference where someone > was criticised for wasting time on privacy concerns).
(You may have opened your question too wide). Privacy against whom? There were enough details revealed about the key escrow LEAF in Clipper to see that the operation derived from over the air transfer of keys in Type I applications. The purpose was to keep a back door private for use of the government. The escrow mechanism an involution of PKI. There were of course concerns as evinced in the hearing under the 105th Congress on 'Privacy in the Digital Age: Encryption and Mandatory Access Hearings', before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Federalism, and Property Rights, of the Committee on The Judiciary, United States Senate in March 1998. These concerns were on the rights of privacy for users. Clipper failed primarily because there wasn't enough trust that the privacy wouldn't be confined to escrow agents authorized by the Judiciary. The Federal government lost credibility through orchestrated actions by those with conscience concerned over personal privacy and potential government abuse. Privacy suffers from lack of legislation and is only taken serious when the threat is pervasive and the voters are up in arms. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majord...@metzdowd.com