[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gnupg-users
Subject:    Re: Enterprise Key Management?
From:       Nicholas Cole <nicholas.cole () gmail ! com>
Date:       2013-03-18 10:24:32
Message-ID: CAAu18hdsTJecWVL=s6G1qABwyGtqmgzd=XDu9N-+0zkpfaU_zg () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]


On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Werner Koch <wk@gnupg.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 16 Mar 2013 12:36, abel@guardianproject.info said:
>
> > This seems like a better application of S/MIME as it, by design, is
> > centralized in the manner you describe.
>
> Hwever, with S/MIME you can _only_ do a centralized key management.
> OpenPGP allows to implement an arbitrary key management policy.
>
> The OP mentioned signing subkeys.  This could for example be used to
> allow several employees to sign data using the same key and the
> recipient will notice a valid signature with a published fingerprint
> from the company.  A closer inspection would reveal which subkey has
> been used for signing and this can be used for internal audit processes
> (similar to the QA labels with an employer number on all kind of
> products).  Revocation of a certain subkey would also be pretty easy.  I
> assume this would easily scale to new dozen subkeys.
>

It's clever.  Given careful management / dissemination it would allow a
group to share an encryption key but have separate signing key.  I don't
know if any software exists that operates in this way.

I do wonder if what the poster really meant, however, is not "subkeys" per
se but Trust-Signature certified keys.

I guess what is needed for most enterprise use is a system where the
company generates employee's keys and keeps a copy of them.

N.

[Attachment #5 (text/html)]

<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, \
Mar 18, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Werner Koch <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a \
href="mailto:wk@gnupg.org" target="_blank">wk@gnupg.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br> \
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc \
solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On Sat, 16 Mar 2013 12:36, <a \
href="mailto:abel@guardianproject.info">abel@guardianproject.info</a> said:<br>

<br>
&gt; This seems like a better application of S/MIME as it, by design, is<br>
&gt; centralized in the manner you describe.<br>
<br>
</div>Hwever, with S/MIME you can _only_ do a centralized key management.<br>
OpenPGP allows to implement an arbitrary key management policy.<br>
<br>
The OP mentioned signing subkeys.  This could for example be used to<br>
allow several employees to sign data using the same key and the<br>
recipient will notice a valid signature with a published fingerprint<br>
from the company.  A closer inspection would reveal which subkey has<br>
been used for signing and this can be used for internal audit processes<br>
(similar to the QA labels with an employer number on all kind of<br>
products).  Revocation of a certain subkey would also be pretty easy.  I<br>
assume this would easily scale to new dozen \
subkeys.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>It&#39;s clever.  Given careful \
management / dissemination it would allow a group to share an encryption key but have \
separate signing key.  I don&#39;t know if any software exists that operates in this \
way.</div> <div style><br></div><div style>I do wonder if what the poster really \
meant, however, is not &quot;subkeys&quot; per se but Trust-Signature certified \
keys.</div><div style><br></div><div style>I guess what is needed for most enterprise \
use is a system where the company generates employee&#39;s keys and keeps a copy of \
them.</div> <div style><br></div><div style>N. </div></div></div></div>



_______________________________________________
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

Configure | About | News | Add a list | Sponsored by KoreLogic