>From - Sat Mar 02 00:57:21 2024
Received: by 10.114.27.20 with SMTP id a20mr1030995waa.23.1204705249102;
Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:20:49 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <mudpu..._at_gmail.com>
Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com (rv-out-0910.google.com [209.85.198.188])
by mx.google.com with ESMTP id k36si539146waf.1.2008.03.05.00.20.47;
Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:20:48 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of mudpu..._at_gmail.com designates 209.85.198.188 as permitted sender) client-ip 9.85.198.188;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of mudpu..._at_gmail.com designates 209.85.198.188 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=mudpu..._at_gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) head..._at_gmail.com
Received: by rv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id k20so794921rvb.0
for <TSCM-..._at_googlegroups.com>; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:20:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h
mainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
bh=VUZVIFXpP6QhggZScVeqT9tcLcg5zRiL4kT/WwQC/OU=;
b tyP3PU1YVb7DAgym9Yk8hPeU/aE6wAoURwnwO0agXHiEod2TWBZzWSZTVu/PzTgzgmQMa5JzrsllpYH7Cmh1XnWkki8nZor5cgbz6F/YNeAswyFMpqCnVy9RdhIKZaEOfVlWE8EHJY9ll75PBL9K1vdj/0GT0dglCMOAHUdPs=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
buAe/ZSdltRDe9SOchgzrzbVyrYNwe6g7DJJc3bm2+JrYS7rdZlppb2FIEGFc0UC8+p/rRah6XU4BNFUZfx1b2ULZMAy83sxbb6wPPidgDA8DM9RxBD8IU3o5TpCs+dJZmuVtiUfLXyCewdjH9zlWaS/eDbXGImABr3Vt30sH4=
Received: by 10.141.2.19 with SMTP id e19mr1056519rvi.221.1204705247125;
Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:20:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.141.186.21 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 00:20:47 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <9c7b276e0803050020t70d5d4a7hc8698abfa9bfcd46_at_mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 00:20:47 -0800
From: "Jacob Wright" <mudpu..._at_gmail.com>
To: TSCM-L2006_at_googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [TSCM-L] {2478} Cryptography - what ever happened to key escrow devices?
In-Reply-To: <197a8337-31c6-474b-b554-d5dac3d8122c_at_m34g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
References: <197a8337-31c6-474b-b554-d5dac3d8122c_at_m34g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>
Look over here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_chip
You might also read
http://www.crypto.com/papers/eesproto.pdf
"Protocol Failure in the Escrowed Encryption Standard"
Dutchguard has them for $99 a pair.
http://www.dutchguard.com/ATT-TSD-3600-telephone-security-device-p-persec.html
On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 6:13 AM, Gary Fomich, Corporate Protective
Solutions LLC <gfo..._at_cpscleveland.com> wrote:
>
> Hello, what ever became of the key escrow program for crypto devices?
>
> Who maintains they keys to the few remaining devices such as 'clipper
> chip' TSD 3600E devices? With the reorganization of federal agencies
> prompted by DHS, who ended up as the keyholders? Wasn't it originally
> NIST & Treasury?
>
> I probably already know the answer this question, but what do you
> think about the use of legacy Clipper Chip devices such as the AT&T
> TSD3600 for clients such as law firms and other privacy oriented
> organizations? Are they keys still secure? Hopefully most clients
> aren't worried about being subjects of LE surveillance and just want
> privacy from business competitors.
>
> Are the current CSD3600 versions subject to a back door or cracking by
> non-governmental agencies?
>
> On a few occasions I've received concerns about threats from unsavory
> 'business intelligence' types and a potential, affordable encryption
> device.
>
> From what I understand, the Communications Security Corp devices were
> originally intended to retail for under 100 dollars!
>
> Thanks!
>
> >
>
Received on Sat Mar 02 2024 - 00:57:21 CST