Abstract
The British Regulations of Investigatory Powers (RIP) Act 2000 is one of the first modern bills for mandatory disclosure of protected data in a democratic country. In this paper we compare this bill from a technical point of view with the US key escrow proposal (EES) and its variants and then, more generally we compare the merits of data confiscation vs key escrow. A major problem with key escrow is that once a private key is recovered it can be used to decipher ciphertexts which were sent well before a warrant was issued (or after its expiration). Several alternative key escrow systems have been proposed in the literature to address this issue. These are equitable, in the sense that the control of society over the individual and the control of the individual over society are fairly shared. We show that equitability is much easier to achieve with data confiscation than with key escrow. Consequently, although the RIP act was heavily criticized in the press and on the internet, it inherently maintains a better level of privacy than key escrow. Finally we present some practical deniable decryption variants of popular public key systems.
Research undertaken while visiting the University of Wollongong.
Chapter PDF
References
M. Abe. A key escrow scheme with time-limited monitoring for one-way communication. In E. Dawson, A. Clark, and C. Boyd, editors, Information Security and Privacy, 5th Australian Conference, ACISP 2000, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1841, Springer 2000, 163–177.
M. Bellare and S. Goldwasser. Verifiable partial key escrow. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, April 1997.
M. Bellare and P. Rogaway. Random oracles are practical: a paradigm for designing efficient protocols. In First ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 1993, 62–73
M. Bellare and P. Rogaway. Optimal Asymmetric Encryption. In A. De Santis, editor, Advances in Cryptology-Eur orypt’ 94, Lecture Notes in Computer Science #950, Springer 1995, 92–111
T. Beth. Zur Sicherheit der Informationstechnik. Informatik-Spektrum, 13, 1990, 204–215. (In German)
G. Brassard, D. Chaum, and C. Crépeau.Minimum disclosure proofs of knowledge. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 37(2), 1998, 156–189
M. Burmester, Y. Desmedt, and J. Seberry. Equitable key escrow with limited time span. In K. Ohta and D. Pei, editors, Advances in Cryptology-Asiacrypt’ 98, Proceedings Lecture Notes in Computer Science #1514, Springer 1998, 380–391
R. Canetti, C. Dwork, M. Naor, and R. Ostrovsky. Deniable encryption. In B. S. Kaliski, editor, Advances in Cryptology-Crypto’ 97, Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer Science #1294, Springer 1997, 90–104
Key recovery alliance (KRA) technology papers. Special Issue of Computer & Security, 2000, 19(1).
D. Chaum and J.-H. Evertse and J. van de Graaf and R. Peralta. In A. Odlyzko, editor, Advances in Cryptology, Proc. of Crypto’ 86, Lecture Notes in Computer Science #263, Springer-Verlag 1987, 200–212
R. Cramer ans V. Shoup. A Practical Public Key Cryptosystem Provably Secure against Adaptive Chosen Ciphertetx Attack. In H. Krawczyk, editor, Advances in Cryptology-Crypto’ 98, Lecture Notes in Computer Science #1462, Springer 1998, 13–25.
D. E. Denning and D. K. Branstad. A taxonomy of key escrow encryption systems. Commun. ACM, 39(3), 1996, 34–40
D. Dolev, C. Dwork, and M. Naor. Non-malleable cryptography. In Proceedings of the Twenty third annual ACM Symp. Theory of Computing, STOC, 1991, 542–552
T. ElGamal. A public key cryptosystem and a signature scheme based on discrete logarithms. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, 1985, 31, 469–472
S. Goldwasser and S. Micali. Probabilistic encryption. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 28(2), 1984, 270–299
S. Goldwasser and S. Micali and C. Racko. The Knowledge Complexity of Interactive Proof Systems. Siam J. Comput., 18(1), 1989, 186–208
J. He and E. Dawson. A new key escrow cryptosystem. In E. Dawson and. J. Golic, editor, Cryptography Policy and Algorithms, Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer Science #1029, Springer 1996, 105–114
J. Kilian and T. Leighton. Failsafe key escrow, revisited. In D. Coppersmith, editor, Advances in Cryptology-Crypto’ 95, Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer Science# 963, Springer 1995, 208–221
D. E. Knuth. The Art of Computer Programming, Vol. 2, Seminumerical Algorithms. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1981.
A. K. Lenstra, P. Winkler, and Y. Yacobi. A key escrow system with warrant bounds. In D. Coppersmith, editor, Advances in Cryptology-Crypto’ 95, Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer Science #963, Springer 1995, 197–207
C. D. Marsan. Internet organization opposes new u.k. wiretapping law. http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/08/04/wiretap..ap.idg/index.html
A. Menezes. P.C van Oorscot and S.A. Vanstone. Handbook of applied cryptography. CRC Press, 1997
S. Micali. Fair public-key cryptosystems. In E. F. Brickell, editor, Advances in Cryptology-Crypto’ 92, Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 740, Springer 1993, 113–138
T. Okamoto and S. Uchiyama. A new Public-Key Cryptosystem as Secure as Factoring. In K. Nyberg, editor, Advances in Cryptology-Eur ocrypt’ 98, Lecture Notes in Computer Science #1403, Springer 1998, 308–318.
R. Perera. Dutch secret service accused of e-mail snooping. http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/08/02/netherlands.email.idg/index.htm
A. P. tzmann, editor. Information Hiding, Third International Workshop, Proceedings Lecture Notes in Computer Science #1768, Springer 1999.
R. L. Rivest and A. Shamir and L. Adleman. A method for obtaining digital signatures and public key cryptosystems. Commun. ACM, 1978 21, 294–299
L. Rohde. U.K. E-mail Snooping Bill passed. http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/07/28/uk.surveillance.idg/index.html
G. J. Simmons. The prisoners' problem and the subliminal channel. In D. Chaum, editor, Advances in Cryptology. Proc. of Crypto 83, pp. 51–67. Plenum Press N.Y., 1984. Santa Barbara, California, August 1983.
G. J. Simmons, observation made at the Workshop on Key Escrow, June 22-24, 1994.
Y. Tsiounis and M. Yung. The security of ElGamal based encryption. In H. Imai and Y. Zheng, editors, Public Key Cryptography, First International Workshop on Practice and Theory in Public Key Cryptography, PKC’98, Springer 1998, 117–134
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Desmedt, Y., Burmester, M., Seberry, J. (2001). Equitability in Retroactive Data Confiscation versus Proactive Key Escrow. In: Kim, K. (eds) Public Key Cryptography. PKC 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1992. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44586-2_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44586-2_20
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-41658-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44586-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive