To:
Richard Shockey <rich.shockey@NeuStar.com>
Cc:
Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU>, keydist@cafax.se, smb@research.att.com, jis@MIT.EDU
From:
Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>
Date:
04 Oct 2002 13:09:53 -0400
In-Reply-To:
<5.1.0.14.2.20021004123415.04335db8@popd.ix.netcom.com>
Sender:
owner-keydist@cafax.se
User-Agent:
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7
Subject:
Re: I intend to have a document ready for Atlanta on this subject.
Richard Shockey <rich.shockey@NeuStar.com> writes:
> Your security point is well taken however fewer indirections are a
> "good thing" but I will trade that for a more diverse and distributed
> infrastructure.
And herein lies the problem. When designing a protocol for security
infrastructure, you cannot trade off security. Well, I suppose you
_can_, but then you're just doing a disservice to yourself and your
users.
-derek
--
Derek Atkins
Computer and Internet Security Consultant
derek@ihtfp.com www.ihtfp.com