Talk:Key escrow

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

There seems to be no discussion of the opposing viewpoint - the reasons behind requiring key escrow etc (Gwinkless 10:12, 9 May 2007 (UTC))

Social vs Technical[edit]

This article seems to have been written with a basis in data security owing to its content (ie "national security") not its function. Key escrow is simply a concept whereby a trusted third party is given decryption keys and there is a situation where these keys are released. This is used in some email system for example. The encryption of data does not imply the value of its contents, nor should this article imply such User A1 04:47, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

In any implementation of encryption there is the implicit implication that there is 'value' in the unencrypted data. Value here is pretty much meaningless without a context - but it is important to note it is always implied even if it is not present. Pre-haps you mean guarantee rather than imply? 88.104.18.39 (talk) 14:35, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

I am missing the socio-ethical dimension here a little. The "mistrust against the system" seems to be, even if one sentence may be read otherwise, just be based on the escrow agent, not the privileged party being potentially able to abuse its power... 80.138.2.127 (talk) 00:15, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

the external link is dead[edit]

http://www.cdt.org/crypto/risks98/ "The risks of key escrow" leads to a "Page not found" error on the server (2010_07_27) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.113.85.93 (talk) 12:27, 27 July 2010 (UTC)


Encryption Policy: Memo for the Vice President CIA memo to Al Gore on suggested US policy on key recovery, 11. September 1996 is also a dead link74.88.130.108 (talk) 19:32, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Thus far, no key escrow system has been designed which meets both objections and nearly all have failed to meet even one.[edit]

this needs to be cited — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.202.102.170 (talk) 21:25, 4 April 2013 (UTC)