On Thursday 19 May 2005 18:28, Ram A Moskovitz wrote:

> On 5/18/05, Duane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > With the intercept and gag laws in the US as they are, Verisign or any
> > other certificate authority can be compelled to issue duplicate
> > certificates,
>
> This may be true, I'm not sure that it is. I suppose that a court
> order is generally compelling so this doesn't sound impossible. On the
> other hand if there is an easier way to do it that is presumably a
> greater concern. How hard would be be to get a CA with an easier
> authentication process to issue a cert for any domain name that you
> wish that would be trusted by Firefox, IE, and Opera?

It depends on who is asking for the certificate.

If it is the US government then it is probably
easier to ask Verisign.  If it is a scammer it
is probably easier to ask a small control-of-
domain issuer.  It all varies, depending.

The history of telecoms and phone tracing
on a large scale indicates that the largest
players were the ones who were targeted
first and fell hardest.

> In any case I 
> think you would go along with any legitimate request made by a
> legitimate government authority; I would.

I think Duane is in Australia.  Are you saying
that he should be happy with any legitimate
request from the US government?  Or are you
suggesting that the Australian Federal Police
could serve a warrant to Verisign in the US to
issue some certs?

If the answer is yes, do we include the "bad"
countries on the list?  Cuba?  Iran?  Iraq?

Do we have a list of legitimate governments?
I think as a first step, if MoFo is planning to
accept intercepts on its products by legitimate
process, then it would be only fair to disclose
which jurisdictions and processes are acceptable,
if only to help those authorities serve the CAs
with the paperwork.

(None of us are speaking for MoFo here, but
if the position of any CAs is that they will take
service from legitimate governments, then it
behoves to let those who might be targeted
know that there are limits.)


> > add on to this the fact that browsers don't warn about
> > fingerprints on certificates changing
>
> There is some truth / value here but there's a usability issue too -
> hopefully a balance can be found. Perhaps for a user who participates
> in high value or high sensitivty transactions this is worth doing; for
> someone spending $27 online, the intrusion anytime the site renews
> it's certificate or changes CA providers or website hosters (if they
> use that route) this is probably overkill and will result in further
> training the user to say OK to anything that pops up.


The only technologies that let you spend $27 online
without you risking more are things like digital cash.
Most all systems in the SSL / HTTPS world do their
transactions with identity and account information,
and the value of that information is generally well
in excess of the transaction at that instance.  Which
means that that the proper protection equation needs
to cover all the information, and the transaction itself
is probably not that important.

> The right approach here in my opinion is to understand that not every
> user has the same level of savvy nor the same level of needs. When
> installing a browser, OS, or any other app a brief interview of the
> user might be a very nice approach. In the case of a web browser the
> two obvious questions are:

HCI is an issue.  My thinking is that the sort of
information bar you posted under "UI training" is
the way to go for a lot of these things.  I believe
the popup warning dialog to be dead in the water
at this stage - although recognise that this is not
a widely held view.  See the recent article on 300
users, and also the HCI/UI papers posted here a
while back.  Oh, and here's another one:

http://www.educatedguesswork.org/movabletype/archives/2005/05/what_can_the_ev.html

Those are Eric Rescorla's slides from a talk he
gave recently where he indicated that the dialog
isn't helping, among other things.  I'd recommend
the slides to you all;  Eric knows a lot about this
field having written the book.

(The rest I agree with in principle.)

iang
-- 
Advances in Financial Cryptography:
   https://www.financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/000458.html
_______________________________________________
mozilla-crypto mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-crypto

Reply via email to