Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Patent From 2004 Describes Dual EC As Key Escrow

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 41 posts

Re: A Patent From 2004 Describes Dual EC As Key Escrow

#31

Post by acqq »

tptacek wrote: post #26
acqq wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/43164/which-prod... Dual_EC_DRBG is actually used in real life products: > we know the RSA BSAFE library uses Dual_EC_DRBG (...) by default, I would guess that this would be the main vector. > As for the use of BSAFE, I can easily find (hint: use your favourite search engine to search for the terms "This product includes" "RSA BSAFE") implementations, oddly skewed towards i…

Once again, the easiest way for me to explain my thoughts about this is to refer back to Lucky Green. It's linked from the Reuters thread on HN.

Still it's misleading when you present it as something not important "because it's not used"! It is used. You don't give any arguments against that fact. Especially if we're serious about the crypto we shouldn't hand-wave but analyze the existing uses and take the steps to fix the issues.

Your insistence to the approach "nothing to see here move along" even after everything discovered up to now makes me wonder about your motives. Care to explain them? Almost as if there is even more that can be seen if we try to and you want to prevent that.

Re: A Patent From 2004 Describes Dual EC As Key Escrow

#32

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #27
maaku wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first sentence of your post could be interpreted to mean that you knew about this for "a little while" but decided not to inform the rest of us, in which case I don't think it's that weird to ask "why didn't you tell us?"

Because I wasn't at liberty to.

[deleted]

Re: A Patent From 2004 Describes Dual EC As Key Escrow

#33

Post by wreegab »

tptacek wrote: post #27
maaku wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first sentence of your post could be interpreted to mean that you knew about this for "a little while" but decided not to inform the rest of us, in which case I don't think it's that weird to ask "why didn't you tell us?"

Because I wasn't at liberty to.

Then why did you answer "What a weird question" instead of just saying so?

Re: A Patent From 2004 Describes Dual EC As Key Escrow

#34

Post by Zigurd »

casca wrote: post #15

This patent was originally owned by Certicom, now part of Blackberry. One of the inventors was Scott Vanstone who's excellent book, Handbook of Applied Cryptography lives on my desk. The patent seems to indicate that Dual EC is known to be usable for escrow, something that the NSA surely knew. But given the pedigree of the authors, it must have been known by a bunch of other people well before the March 2013 publicat…

> But given the pedigree of the authors, it must have been known by a bunch of other people well before the March 2013 publication date

Unfortunately I cannot recall the details of key escrow as it was implemented in Lotus Notes. It is a fact Notes used BSAFE. And it appears to be true that key escrow, or key recovery, was an intentional feature of this RNG. But I did not learn, at the time, how key escrow was implemented in Notes.

Re: A Patent From 2004 Describes Dual EC As Key Escrow

#35

Post by tptacek »

acqq wrote: post #31
tptacek wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once again, the easiest way for me to explain my thoughts about this is to refer back to Lucky Green. It's linked from the Reuters thread on HN.

Still it's misleading when you present it as something not important "because it's not used"! It is used. You don't give any arguments against that fact. Especially if we're serious about the crypto we shouldn't hand-wave but analyze the existing uses and take the steps to fix the issues. Your insistence to the approach "nothing to see here move along" even after everything discovered up to now makes me wonder about…

Can you tell me why I'd care what you think of my motives? The question makes me think less of you already. Maybe we're better off not knowing each other any better.

Re: A Patent From 2004 Describes Dual EC As Key Escrow

#37

Post by tptacek »

ghshephard wrote: post #28
tptacek wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a weird question.

It was the same question I had, in good faith, when I read your comment. In fact, it over rode (in my mind) everything else you wrote - I kept asking myself, "Why was he waiting for it to come out? Did he discover it, and not tell other people? Was he wondering whether this existed, but had not found it? Did he have a colleague tell him they were onto something, and he was waiting for them to publish. Has he known al…

Again, this is so weird. But: ok.

Re: A Patent From 2004 Describes Dual EC As Key Escrow

#38

Post by mattbasta »

tptacek wrote: post #35
acqq wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still it's misleading when you present it as something not important "because it's not used"! It is used. You don't give any arguments against that fact. Especially if we're serious about the crypto we shouldn't hand-wave but analyze the existing uses and take the steps to fix the issues. Your insistence to the approach "nothing to see here move along" even after everything discovered up to now makes me wonder about…

Can you tell me why I'd care what you think of my motives? The question makes me think less of you already. Maybe we're better off not knowing each other any better.

Alright kids, hug it out

Re: A Patent From 2004 Describes Dual EC As Key Escrow

#39

Post by acqq »

tptacek wrote: post #35
acqq wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still it's misleading when you present it as something not important "because it's not used"! It is used. You don't give any arguments against that fact. Especially if we're serious about the crypto we shouldn't hand-wave but analyze the existing uses and take the steps to fix the issues. Your insistence to the approach "nothing to see here move along" even after everything discovered up to now makes me wonder about…

Can you tell me why I'd care what you think of my motives? The question makes me think less of you already. Maybe we're better off not knowing each other any better.

We as humans try to find the patterns and discover the causes. My question to you was nothing more than the attempt to get the direct information regarding your insistence to the unusual approach (repeating the claims that it's unimportant, ignoring the explicit examples of the uses of the compromised mechanism) to the topic we comment to. My question reflects my (maybe false) belief that there must be a reason for that. I believed it's better asking you directly than trying to devise some theories like some other users already did.

Re: A Patent From 2004 Describes Dual EC As Key Escrow

#40

Post by tptacek »

acqq wrote: post #39
tptacek wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you tell me why I'd care what you think of my motives? The question makes me think less of you already. Maybe we're better off not knowing each other any better.

We as humans try to find the patterns and discover the causes. My question to you was nothing more than the attempt to get the direct information regarding your insistence to the unusual approach (repeating the claims that it's unimportant, ignoring the explicit examples of the uses of the compromised mechanism) to the topic we comment to. My question reflects my (maybe false) belief that there must be a reason for t…

"I'm just questioning your motives. At least I didn't present a fully-formed hypothesis about how evil you were, like everyone else does". Got it.

How about this: if you think I get facts wrong or disagree with my conclusions, you say so. If I'm wrong --- not outside the realm of possibility --- I'll thank you for the correction.

I don't care what you think about my motives and am not interested in discussing that topic.

Post reply on HN