Re: PolicyMaker paper available

Mab@Research.Att.Com posted:
>A number of people have been asking me about some work I've been doing
>(with Joan Feigenbaum and Jack Lacy) on alternatives to traditional
>(X.509, PGP, etc.) identity-based certificates.  We've just finished
>up our paper on the concept, "Decentralized Trust Management", to
>appear at the Oakland Security Conference in May.
>
>A PostScript pre-print is available in
>     ftp://research.att.com/dist/mab/policymaker.ps

I D/Led this file last night & printed it out. I was a little suspicious
at first because you'd think if AT&T really wanted people to read (instead
of just wanting to say they published it) they'd put it on the web in http
and not use obscure printer codes. But after I read it my suspicious
nature was confirmed.

Behind all the obscure printer codes and fancy language, it is obvious to
anyone with half a brain that this is just a move by AT&T to put itself
on top of the internet certificate hierarchy where your're locked in
to using AT&T software and internet service (just like RSA and Netscape).
You have to license AT&T code to use it and you need an AT&T approved
policy attribute or something in order to make it work.

Ask yourself why they'd publish this otherwise. Hint: youre safer trusting
university research than corporate research-marketing.

PGP is good enuf for me.

>-matt
>
>[NB: I no longer read the cypherpunks list with any regularity, so
>please cc me directly on any comments or discussion.  Thanks.]

Uh huhhhhhh. Blaze and AT&T are no friends of the cypherpunks and no
longer even condesend to pretend as much.

Don't even ask me about their motives for supporting the Leahy
key escrow bill.

ECafe Anonymous Remailer writes:
[Crap]
> I D/Led this file last night & printed it out. I was a little suspicious
> at first because you'd think if AT&T really wanted people to read (instead
> of just wanting to say they published it) they'd put it on the web in http
> and not use obscure printer codes.

Huh? Postscript an "obscure printer code"?

> Behind all the obscure printer codes and fancy language, it is obvious to
> anyone with half a brain that this is just a move by AT&T to put itself
> on top of the internet certificate hierarchy where your're locked in
> to using AT&T software and internet service (just like RSA and Netscape).
> You have to license AT&T code to use it and you need an AT&T approved
> policy attribute or something in order to make it work.

You are on drugs, whomever you are. Matt and company have done some
very interesting work here on certificate policies. The work is
unpatented and involves no proprietary AT&T technology. In short, you
are both an stupid and paranoid. You probably didn't understand what
you were reading.

If you had a milligram of self respect, you'd come out from behind
that anonymous remailer. Of course, I expect that you know that your
words are embarassing rather than something to be proud of.

The paper in question is seminal. I strongly urge people who don't
drool when they open their mouths to read it.

Perry

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

"Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com> writes:
> Huh? Postscript an "obscure printer code"?

I now work from a paperless office and find postscript an "obscure
printer code".  It has taken an annoying amount of hacking to view this
postscript file on my PC.

> The paper in question is seminal. I strongly urge people who don't
> drool when they open their mouths to read it.

On the strength of this recomendation I did the hacking and make it
available for the "convenience" of others in the same boat.

http://www.transarc.com/afs/transarc.com/public/ota/html/policymaker.html

This page consists on Matt's original message plus 10 inline gif images
of about 40Kb each.  Clumsy but effective.

Ted Anderson

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMVrJBQGojC9e/wyBAQFN3gQAvt1rX/fw76zhlsU0Td8CbBpUCc6qKoel
xCX647WovUWnyoGnjCoYYruEPiCI6QT2KUo6dpWRR1dIdZVshLCT3gsnJe5m+qRp
rQBthay+T3kk0ZQqVnwlXoLYMJoFQVBhScfxhMta/RGopzS6OYnwrAJHzET62Dgf
b0bPURYrkNA=
=ZqYX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Ted Anderson writes:
> "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com> writes:
> > Huh? Postscript an "obscure printer code"?
> 
> I now work from a paperless office and find postscript an "obscure
> printer code".  It has taken an annoying amount of hacking to view this
> postscript file on my PC.

Printer code, yes. Obscure, no.

Perry