Re: Rarity: Crypto question enclosed

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

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

To: mianigand@outlook.net, cypherpunks@toad.com
Date: Mon Nov 11 12:31:25 1996
> > My simple question is regarding key/certificate distribution:
> >
> >         Is there any particular reason that such can't be
> accomplished via
> > on-line lists, and made available via a service on a port, using
> standard
> > (textual) commands, like mail and such are now?
>
> It's possible to have a key-server listen on a port and accept
> requests, then it would
> fork a process, process the result, and return an answer set.
> 
> But how many CPU cycles would it take for a machine to process a
> request, ie going through
> 1000 of keys?  I am not exactly sure, it took a long while on my
> pentium.
> 
> In my opinion, if I were to run a key server as a service, with
> clients connecting and requesting a key
> it shouldn't take more than a minute to get a responce.
> 

Agreed - a proper search algorithm should yield an answer in a few seconds, 
at most.

> >         The things that come to mind are a 'client' request for a
> key, a
> > 'client' submission of a key, an external host requesting a key
> exchange,
> > and the host itself requesting a key exchange with another system
> (only
> > new/changed keys being swapped).
> 
> Had the exact same idea, but came up with an interesting concept. When
> a person submits a key, a PGP process is spawned yeilding the
> following information 1.) The name (peponmc@cris.com) 2.) The real
> name (Michael Peponis) 3.) The key size 4.) Creation date of the key
> 5.) Key finger print
> 
> This information, along with the acutal key would be inserted into a
> SQL Database table
> 
> With a structure similar to this

... <deletia> ...

The reason I brought the idea up here was in the hope that others on the CP 
list could help work out the fussy details of the protocol: what info would 
need to be included for what types of exchanges, what port(s) would be good 
to work with, etc. Platform/implementation would be subject to considerable 
variation - but the idea would survive (hopefully :-)

> 
> It's not that hard, it's performance that's more of an issue.  The
> beauty of my approch would be that initially, there would be alot of
> "Add" requests, resulting in many PGP processes running on the box,
> but eventually, they would tapper off.

Again, implementation on any particular platform using any particular OS 
would be up to the afficionados of said platforms/OS's. I'm more interested 
in the CP list coming up with the protocol/standards.

Dave


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

iQCVAwUBMoasIsVrTvyYOzAZAQEkTAP+JQtMdr5x+Wz4s6SXchgA4ow3+P9WLpzs
JpjXRbNeHspJ2btlAe4pSgRqSp9oygqJ6Nxpa6DFOC4uB6sl3NaOw8tzcVVJm8GN
+QsGP3KBoeTtRh1xE5yUsFoWmGWSqtDLLhu7bU34TaryLBU/Hvj2mOQXqwXhQlvE
FhE5VETJJ2o=
=LG7t
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

The address you mailed to is no longer valid.
This is probably because the user in question was an
old Open Net subscriber. Open Net is NO LONGER an ISP,
and has not been since May 1996.

We have no redirection address for that user. Please
remove them from any mailing lists you might have.

This response was generated automatically.