small discussion of security proportional to risk:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#61 security proportional to risk

slightly related
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#5 E-commerce security????
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#54 Does "Strong Security" Mean
Anything?

also slightly related, both the tpm chips and various card chips are
similar ... some with eal3-high or eal4-high evaluation. however these
ratings are typically just for the chip ... or the chip with the barest of
software .... not the completely delivered operation environment.

trying to get an EAL5-high or EAL6-high on the complete package .... would
include getting evaluation on things like any crypto (for those chips
employing crypto) ... which is a interesting whole 'nother exercise.
slightly related:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm12.htm#13 anybody seen (EAL5) semi-formal
specification for FIPS186-2/x9.62 ecdsa?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#71 history of CMS
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#84 history of CMS
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#86 formal fips186-2/x9.62 definition
for eal 5/6 evaluation




[EMAIL PROTECTED] on 8/10/2002 11:01 pm wrote:

Can't be done.  I don't have time to go into ALL the reasons.
Fortunately for me, any one reason is sufficient.  #1: it's all about
the economics.  You have failed to specify that the cost of breaking
into the data has to exceed the value of the data.  But even if you
did that, you'd have to assume that the data was never worth more than
that to *anyone*.  As soon as it was worth that, they could break into
the data, and data is, after all, just data.

Ignore economics at your peril.

--
-russ nelson              http://russnelson.com |
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | businesses persuade
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | governments coerce
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   |

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

Reply via email to