[68144] in Cypherpunks
AW: (Fwd) Binding cryptography - much work, little point ?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric Verheul)
Wed Oct 16 11:42:24 1996
From: Eric Verheul <everheul@NGI.NL>
To: "'cypherpunks@toad.com'" <cypherpunks@toad.com>
Cc: "'Bert-Jaap Koops'" <E.J.Koops@kub.nl>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 16:38:23 +-100
>peter.allan@aeat.co.uk (Peter M Allan) wrote:
>[skip]
>I suspect the scheme is incomplete anyway. After skimming the web page I
>see that the aim is to show the same session key has been encrypted under
>different ElGamal pubkeys. Now who's to say those pubkeys belong to anyone ?
>Or is this what is meant by "such as Margaret's identity" ? You'd list the
>ids of the TRPs and also prove that the pubkeys used were theirs .... ?
>
One can imagine that included in the certified key of a TRP is a statement
like "PKI-ROLE = Trusted Retrieval Party". As it is certified by a higher order (e.g. a root of the PKI) it can be verified.
Eric
