# Re: Is symmetric key distribution equivalent to symmetric key generation?

**From:** David Wagner (*daw_at_taverner.cs.berkeley.edu*)

**Date:** 08/25/05

**Next message:**Paul Rubin: "Re: Theoretical limits for password length"**Previous message:**David Wagner: "Re: Theoretical limits for password length"**In reply to:**chuckles: "Re: Is symmetric key distribution equivalent to symmetric key generation?"**Next in thread:**chuckles: "Re: Is symmetric key distribution equivalent to symmetric key generation?"**Reply:**chuckles: "Re: Is symmetric key distribution equivalent to symmetric key generation?"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 02:06:18 +0000 (UTC)

chuckles wrote:

*>>What is it about key
*

*>>transport that you find unacceptable? If you can answer that question,
*

*>>I may be able to help.
*

*>
*

*>To briefly answer this question, I don't think PKIs and X509 in
*

*>particular are the way forward.
*

Huh? This is very confused. Key transport != X509.

You're mixing apples and oranges.

I didn't ask what is wrong with X509, I asked what is wrong with

key transport protocols. The two are orthogonal. X509 is about how

you get Alice's public key. Key transport is about, once you have Alice's

public key, how you exchange a session key with her.

**Next message:**Paul Rubin: "Re: Theoretical limits for password length"**Previous message:**David Wagner: "Re: Theoretical limits for password length"**In reply to:**chuckles: "Re: Is symmetric key distribution equivalent to symmetric key generation?"**Next in thread:**chuckles: "Re: Is symmetric key distribution equivalent to symmetric key generation?"**Reply:**chuckles: "Re: Is symmetric key distribution equivalent to symmetric key generation?"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]