3 ms·
It's not even about freedom. The NSA and FBI would love to get legislation in place that weakens encryption, but the fact of the matter is you can't weaken encr
by sh-run 7y ago
It's not even about freedom. The NSA and FBI would love to get legislation in place that weakens encryption, but the fact of the matter is you can't weaken encryption without breaking it.
Your options are basically to either force everyone to use short keys that can be brute forced by the NSA (and anyone with cash to throw at AWS) or to set up a trusted-third party to store everyone's private keys and then either enforce long key lives or come up with a mechanism to transport the keys to the third party as old ones expire.
Weakening encryption would lead to massive issues for both corporate and personal security. What's worse is there wouldn't be anything stopping anyone from rolling their own crypto without the NSA's permission (it's literally just math), so it'd be business as usual for terrorists and black-hats.
- rocqua 7y agoTo be honest, the solution here is different. Just allow for signed firmware that uses the TPM without a time-lock. Similar things could be done for many forms of encryption at rest secured by a TPM based on a PIN or fingerprints. (Though I am not sure about fingerprints). This can essentially be done without key escrow. Though you could see this as key escrow where the signing key for code that accesses the TPM as the master key.