[Box Backup] Cryptographic checking

[Peter Harrison]

On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 22:24, Ben Summers wrote:

> But this is not good enough. Now that it is getting popular, I really
> think the crypto needs to be checked out by one of these professionals
> with a view to getting a statement from them for the web site.

Peter Gutmann of the University of Auckland is an internationally renoun 
encryption expert - and has written crypto libraries. I don't think you could 
find anyone better to examine and endorse the application. I'm not sure what 
kind of money he would want though. I would have to talk with him about it.

> Fortunately, I know just the people to do this, but it's not
> particularly cheap to get this done. I would estimate between 1000 and
> 2000 UK pounds based on my previous experience of using them to check
> out things. I really can't afford this on my own.

We would consider funding this effort. Right now I have coders working on some 
new functionality that we will be donating to the box backup project. This 
includes a web based registration system that sets up accounts via web 
interface, and a web (apache) based system for restoring files.

> Is it worth me getting a quote from them and asking the user community
> for donations to get this funded?

I would like to know who would be doing the work personally - as they must 
have a pretty high profile. I think that it will probably cost more and take 
longer than you expect. We probably also need to do some prepatory work in 
documenting the protocols and procedures that the application uses. Trying to 
work out these things from code generally isn't where these guys start.

Peter Gutmann is one of the foremost experts on Encryption. I also know Bill 
Raike personally. Bill Raike invented RPK public key encryption, and started 
the company called SecureMedia. Bill might be an option for certification of 
the software, although he is not as well known as Peter.

There is also PGP inventor Phil Zimmerman, although I doubt he has much to do 
anymore with this kind of work. There are of course many other recognised 
experts - but I would strongly suggest we find someone who has some 
authority.

Actually I think the first stage should be the documentation of the protocol 
used by Box Backup, and the submission of that protocol to a journal that 
concerns itself with Encryption. This means that experts in the field will 
have the opportunity to critique it without examination of the code.

We should then seek to have commercial interests pay for a formal examination 
of both the protocol and the implementation - which must be considered 
separate things. We need to develop units tests to show that the box backup 
behaves correctly, and that it cannot be comprimised by buffer overruns and 
other subversion.

I know that my company is willing to provide some financing to make this 
happen. We are not big though - I don't have hundreds of thousands of dollars 
to throw at this project, but its not nil either :)

Once the protocol has been examined the protocol itself should be submitted to 
become a RFC, and perhaps to other standards bodies to become a formal 
standard in remote backup. In this way we are being open, and perhaps other 
companies will adopt our protocols, and thus we will have a larger effect 
than just writing the software.

Regards,
Peter