home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.crypt
- Path: sparky!uunet!enterpoop.mit.edu!bloom-picayune.mit.edu!news.mit.edu!warlord
- From: warlord@MIT.EDU (Derek Atkins)
- Subject: Re: Multi-way encryption/FAQ/archives?
- In-Reply-To: shaun@octel.com's message of Thu, 10 Dec 1992 18:47:23 GMT
- Message-ID: <WARLORD.92Dec11210157@deathtongue.mit.edu>
- Sender: news@athena.mit.edu (News system)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: deathtongue.mit.edu
- Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
- References: <1992Dec10.184723.6236@octel.com>
- Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 02:02:11 GMT
- Lines: 29
-
- In article <1992Dec10.184723.6236@octel.com> shaun@octel.com (Attack of the Dayglo Howler Monkeys) writes:
-
- Is there some way the public-key idea can be extended to handle a centralized
- distribution point? That is, A sends a message to a redistribution point
- R, which forwards the message on to B, C, and D. A performs encryption, and
- B, C, and D all decrypt the message and get authentication that it was
- from A as well. R does nothing but redistribute, and contains no keys or
- encryption software.
-
- A would be responsible for collecting the public keys of B, C, and D.
-
- Yes. This is really simple, assuming A knows that B, C, and D are
- going to be the only recipients. All B has to do is encrypt the
- message in some secret-key system (DES, IDEA, etc.), and then use
- Public-Key encryption to encrypt the secret key in the Public Key of
- *each* recipient on the list, and include that in the message, and
- then send this whole thing to the mail-exploder, which will send the
- message to everyone else.
-
- If A, however, DOESN'T know the keys of B, C, or D, or if E gets added
- to the list and A doesn't know this, the above method will fail.
-
- -derek
-
- --
- Derek Atkins -- MIT '93 -- Electrical Engineering
- --warlord@MIT.EDU | ..!mit-eddie!mit-athena!warlord | s20069@mitvma.bitnet
- Chairman, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB)
- MIT Media Laboratory, Speech Research Group
-