Subject: Policy-Discussion
List archive
- From: Daniel Black <daniel AT cacert.org>
- To: cacert-policy AT lists.cacert.org
- Subject: Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow
- Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 09:27:07 +1100
- Authentication-results: lists.cacert.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.i= AT cacert.org; dkim-asp=none
- Organization: CAcert
On Friday 26 March 2010 00:00:35 Elwing wrote:
>
> I just wanted to respond to this part - is there a lockbox facility at the
> Data center where the root is hosted? Could it possibly used to store
> such a token? There's a list of "authorized users" that can request the
> contents of that box, they have the pin to unlock that token. You'd
> effectively need two people: the Data Center manager/operations staff for
> physical access, and the person with the PIN for logical access. The PIN
> could be changed if necessary.
I seem to think the risk of legal impounding of CAcert's infrastructure
needed
to be considered. Like all security solutions its a tradeoff and this may be
one of them that gets traded off.
> Another method I've seen (and it's been audited against the Federal bridge,
> but not any of the WebTrust/etc audits) is that the root key is stored on
> the RootCA hard drives. The drives are RAIDed - 2 need to be brought
> together to bring up the CA. However, this only works when you've got an
> off-line root.
yes - offline root is a highly desirable requirement
nice idea. Using software raid it could even be used for USB disks or any
other media. The RAID natively supports the M of N required for recovery.
--
Daniel Black
CAcert
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
- Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Daniel Black, 03/23/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Elwing, 03/23/2010
- HSM escrow - was: Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Daniel Black, 03/23/2010
- Re: HSM escrow - was: Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Mark Lipscombe, 03/24/2010
- Re: HSM escrow - was: Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Ian G, 03/24/2010
- Re: HSM escrow - was: Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Mark Lipscombe, 03/24/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Dieter Hennig, 03/23/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Lambert Hofstra, 03/24/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Elwing, 03/25/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Daniel Black, 03/25/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Ian G, 03/25/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Elwing, 03/25/2010
- HSM escrow - was: Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Daniel Black, 03/23/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Ian G, 03/23/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Andreas Bürki, 03/24/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Mark Lipscombe, 03/24/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Daniel Black, 03/24/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Mark Lipscombe, 03/24/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Daniel Black, 03/24/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Ian G, 03/24/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Mark Lipscombe, 03/24/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Ian G, 03/24/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Mark Lipscombe, 03/24/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Daniel Black, 03/24/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Mark Lipscombe, 03/24/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Andreas Bürki, 03/24/2010
- Re: Board inquisition of Multi-member escrow, Elwing, 03/23/2010
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.