[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Name spaces for secret keys?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
At 05:27 PM 11/25/97 -0500, Ron Rivest wrote:
>
>Hi guys --
>
>Let's get off the date and time issue, which is really minor.
>
>Here is a more interesting question:
>
>Should _secret_ keys have associated SDSI namespaces? (The current
>proposal seems to allow this, but I'm not sure exactly how to understand
>or motivate this...)
I, too, would like to hear discussion of this.
Here at CyberCash, it's become obvious that we need certificates for passing
information between machines which are our own property. Those
machines can share secret keys (e.g., HMAC-SHA1) for signing of
local-interest certificates. Secret key signatures have an obvious
performance advantage, if you don't have to share keys with non-local
verifiers. We haven't come up with a need for names defined and passed from
one local machine to another, but then we haven't looked very hard for such
needs either.
- Carl
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBNHtTmRN3Wx8QwqUtAQG8mAP+Jh7cTh75WW5ejg5qVNR0+twR+E7BtfSI
OOgQhYCKiYhMBZCv/pKNkJ7DnBFnvXz26ibYuZqGPQfnZiH1SNsa23VBheVg3KTZ
HCXb/88Z8jUhwbNr6mp74inQa3OGV3cFQpLwKWyps6LRtGqd/ZelSCJSoKfk5XYj
jiX0YYAy0RY=
=fYDR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Carl M. Ellison cme@cybercash.com http://www.clark.net/pub/cme |
|CyberCash, Inc. http://www.cybercash.com/ |
|207 Grindall Street PGP 08FF BA05 599B 49D2 23C6 6FFD 36BA D342 |
|Baltimore MD 21230-4103 T:(410) 727-4288 F:(410)727-4293 |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
References: