Self Generated Encryption Key Good Bad

Posted on by admin
Good

The security risks of using an internally generated key were discussed above, and if the key is purged, the data-at-rest is lost forever. When the externally provided (or pre-placed) key option is used, the AES key can be provided via commands after properly logging into the FIPS encryption module and the user is authenticated. For technical reasons, an encryption scheme usually uses a pseudo-random encryption key generated by an algorithm. It is in principle possible to decrypt the message without possessing the key, but, for a well-designed encryption scheme, considerable computational resources and skills are required. Oct 18, 2016 The encryption keys generated in modern cryptographic algorithms are generated depending upon the algorithm used. Primarily there are two types of encryption schemes: Symmetric and Asymmetric(Public Key encryption). Therefore, a robust encryption key management system and policies includes: Key lifecycle: key generation, pre-activation, activation, expiration, post-activation, escrow, and destruction. Physical access to the key server(s) Logical access to the key server(s) User/Role access to the encryption keys.

Here introduce 3 ways to back up encryption certificate and key in Windows 10. Create a backup of your file encryption certificate and key is a good way to avoid losing access to encrypted files and folders if the original key lost. Microsoft may have your encryption key; here’s how to take it back. Or even bad actors within the company might undermine that promise. The new key generated this way won't be synced to.

Self Generated Encryption Key Good Bad Credit

  1. Liu, J.K., Au, M.H.: Self-Generated-Certificate Public Key Cryptosystem. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2006/194 (2006), http://eprint.iacr.org/2006/194
  2. Al-Riyami, S.S., Paterson, K.: Certificateless public key cryptography. In: Laih, C.-S. (ed.) ASIACRYPT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2894, pp. 452–473. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  3. Al-Riyami, S.S., Paterson, K.: Certificateless public key cryptography. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2003/126 (2003), http://eprint.iacr.org/2003/126
  4. Baek, J., Safavi-Naini, R., Susilo, W.: Certificateless public key encryption without pairing. In: Zhou, J., Lopez, J., Deng, R.H., Bao, F. (eds.) ISC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3650, pp. 134–148. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  5. Bentahar, K., Farshim, P., Malone-Lee, J.: Generic constructions of identity-based and certificateless KEMs. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2005/058 (2005), http://eprint.iacr.org/2005/058
  6. Libert, B., Quisquater, J.: On constructing certificateless cryptosystems from identity based encryption. In: Yung, M., Dodis, Y., Kiayias, A., Malkin, T.G. (eds.) PKC 2006. LNCS, vol. 3958, pp. 474–490. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Yum, D.H., Lee, P.J.: Generic construction of certificateless encryption. In: Conejo, R., Urretavizcaya, M., Pérez-de-la-Cruz, J.-L. (eds.) Current Topics in Artificial Intelligence. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3040, pp. 802–811. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  8. Shi, Y., Li, J.: Provable efficient certificateless public key encryption. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2005/287 (2005), http://eprint.iacr.org/2005/287
  9. Cheng, Z., Comley, R.: Efficient certificateless public key encryption. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2005/012 (2005), http://eprint.iacr.org/2005/012
  10. Girault, M.: Self-certified public keys. In: Davies, D.W. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1991. LNCS, vol. 547, pp. 490–497. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)Google Scholar
  11. Petersen, H., Horster, P.: Self-certified keys - concepts and applications. In: 3rd Int. Conference on Communications and Multimedia Security, pp. 102–116. Chapman and Hall, Boca Raton (1997)Google Scholar
  12. Lee, B., Kim, K.: Self-Certificate: PKI using Self-Certified Key. In: Proc. of Conference on Information Security and Cryptology 2000, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 65-73 (2000)Google Scholar
  13. Shamir, A.: Identity-based Cryptosystems and Signature Schemes. In: Blakely, G.R., Chaum, D. (eds.) CRYPTO 1984. LNCS, vol. 196, pp. 47–53. Springer, Heidelberg (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bellare, M., Rogaway, P.: Random Oracles are Practical: A Paradigm for Designing Efficient Protocols. In: ACM CCCS ’93, pp. 62–73. ACM, New York (1993)Google Scholar
  15. Schnorr, C.P.: Efficient signature generation by smart cards. Journal of Cryptology 4(3), 161–174 (1991)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. Pointcheval, D., Stern, J.: Security proofs for signature schemes. In: Maurer, U.M. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1996. LNCS, vol. 1070, pp. 387–398. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  17. Waters, B.: Efficient identity-based encryption without random oracles. In: Cramer, R.J.F. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 2005. LNCS, vol. 3494, pp. 114–127. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar