Re: [Trans] Call for adoption, draft-linus-trans-gossip-ct

[Tom Ritter <[e-mail]>]

On 8 August 2015 at 12:25, Bryan Ford <[e-mail]> wrote:
> [Many good things]

Okay.  If I simplify unfairly I think I agree with many of the root
points of your email.

1) Yes, more logs plus even a weeks worth of STHs probably affords too
much ability for tracking. Releasing a STH will have some sort of
probability attached to it, but again 'statistics'[0]. I've open a
ticket to make sure we don't lose this.

2) Yes, a multi-signer log is more resistant to attack than a
single-signer log. I would note there's nothing that would stop
someone from running a multi-signer log using distributed signing; and
if you can work out the practicalities, your log would probably be
seen as one of the more trustworthy ones. I'm doubtful of the
likelihood of converting existing logs into this model, but since CT
can evolve over time, and logs can be removed/added, there's no reason
it can't be a long-term goal.

-tom

[0] I think there will be a revival (or at least a re-visit) of the
research done for pooling strategies in remailers. There was a paper
that summed up all the different pooling strategies. Don't remember
the name, but I know it's on http://www.freehaven.net/anonbib/