[444] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Analysis of proposed UK ban on use of non-escrowed crypto.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ben Laurie)
Tue Apr 1 21:05:22 1997
To: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 1997 22:41:39 +0000 (GMT)
From: Ben Laurie <ben@gonzo.ben.algroup.co.uk>
Cc: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net, cryptography@c2.net, trei@process.com,
ttp.comments@ciid.dti.gov.uk, rja14@cl.cam.ac.uk, aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk
In-Reply-To: <199703220147.BAA01386@server.test.net> from "Adam Back" at Mar 22, 97 01:47:44 am
Reply-To: ben@algroup.co.uk
Oh yes, the other two important points to note are:
1. Confusion of TTPs and CAs. Although a TTP can, of course, perform the
function of a CA, a CA can do the job just as well. The need for CAs does not
justify TTPs. The document makes no attempt to make this clear.
2. Implementability. The crypto community has yet to see, to my knowledge, a
key escrow system that actually works.
Cheers,
Ben.
--
Ben Laurie Phone: +44 (181) 994 6435 Email: ben@algroup.co.uk
Freelance Consultant and Fax: +44 (181) 994 6472
Technical Director URL: http://www.algroup.co.uk/Apache-SSL
A.L. Digital Ltd, Apache Group member (http://www.apache.org)
London, England. Apache-SSL author
