Re: Restricted storage

[Jonathan S. Shapiro]

On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 20:55 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> At Thu, 01 Jun 2006 10:28:12 -0400,
> "Jonathan S. Shapiro" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 12:30 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > > At Thu, 01 Jun 2006 05:21:21 -0400,
> > > "Jonathan S. Shapiro" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 10:20 +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 08:23:53PM -0400, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> > > > > > Indeed. And while we are about it: where do you propose to store 
> > > > > > keys
> > > > > > that are used for group signatures?
> > > > > 
> > > > > In some place that cannot be destroyed by any of the members of the 
> > > > > group, but
> > > > > only by the group administrators.  That is, in a special user account 
> > > > > created
> > > > > specially for that group.
> > > > 
> > > > Ah. So you propose that the computational "right of assembly" should be
> > > > present only with the consent of the system administrator?
> > > 
> > > Can you pelase define what you mean by "computational 'right of
> > > assembly'"?  The term is entirely void of meaning to me.
> > 
> > If the group keys should be stored in a specially created account, then
> > the system administrator's permission is required in order to form a
> > private group. This seems contrary to freedom.
> 
> I think you did not answer my question.

Indeed. I was retracting my original wording and clarifying my intent,
which you chose to ignore.

Very well, let me define this now-completely-pointless term:

(Computational) Right of Assembly:

  Authorized users of a system who are also authorized to communicate
  should be able to collaborate without the permission, interference,
  or knowledge of the system administrator.


shap