[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OT: Smartcards and Physical Security

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 14:17:18 +1100, Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au> said: 

> On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 12:34, Don Armstrong <don@donarmstrong.com>
> wrote:
>> The problems associated with them aren't too terribly different
>> from those associated with keys or other forms of physical
>> security, notably, that they can be stolen, or the output from them
>> duplicated.

> Using a smart-card means that logging in does not merely require
> "something you know" but also "something you have".  All the good
> security guides say that security should depend on "something you
> know and something you have", smart-cards plus a password meets this
> criteria.

	An even better security guideline is "something you are" -- so
 should we not spring for retinal scanners/fingerprint readers/other
 buiometrics? I mean, we _are_ talking about other peoples money. :P

> GPG smart-cards are entering the market.  If GPG is crackable then
> we have lost regardless.  If GPG is secure then GPG smart-cards will
> do as long as they are not stolen.  Having revokation proceedures
> for stolen cards and DD's reliable enough to follow them should deal
> with this.

	Laptops with biometric print readers are supposed to be around
 the horizon as well.


You don't move to Edina, you achieve Edina. Guindon
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: