A $25,000,000,000 PKI Was:Spec. on QC-low-fat & QC-heavy-bio

["Anders Rundgren" <anders.rundgren@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Steve,

>As far as a relying party is concerned, applying the signature consistent
>with the certificate associated with the transaction is the basis (though
>not the whole story) for non-repudiation of the transaction. All of the
>digital signature laws and guidelines embody this notion, as do all
>technical standards with which I am familiar.

Of course, they are built on the fundamental principle that the
client always has the "final" cert and key.  CyberPhone is not.

>If one has a security failure
>at the server, it's not the relying party's problem, it is the client's
>problem. 
>This sort of server design introduces a new component to the
>system that must be trusted by the client

The real "Client" in a business-to-business situation is the company (and their server)
that have much more problems with their employees and certificate distribution than they have
with unsecure servers.  By having the "person-client" sign a transaction
as well you are technically on the safe side.   Did you actually read the dynamic certs paper?

>and creates a higher value target if the server is shared by more than one
>user.  I'd say that makes this type of approach, in your system or any similar one, 
>potentially a lot less secure than systems in which the signing is performed solely by the
>client. 

You say: "You can't build a secure server".  I say: "Every Internet-bank system needs
the same security level that a CyberPhone intermediary server requires"

>While I can't prevent people from making a security implementation
>tradeoff in favor of systems of this sort, I certainly would not endorse
>any accommodations to a standard to facilitate system design approaches of
>this sort, due to the adverse secruity implications.

I would not be so sure about that since there are TONS of advantages to
gain if you read carefully the around 25 pages of information on the site.

And then there is the cost issue.  This is CHEAP, mass-produced stuff.

Imagine a PKI that 2005 has 1 billion users (projected mobile phone deployment)
where each user pays $25 to have his/hers CyberID.  That is

    $25,000,000,000 / Year !!!!

VeriSign, Thawte, are you listening?

It is absolutely worth HUGE sums to create secure servers and even "adjust" laws on
digital signatures.  Maybe BBN could be interested in the server business? :-)

Anders Rundgren
Senior Internet e-commerce Architect

http://www.mobilephones-tng.com