Talk:Key ceremony

message: This article has been annotated stating it needs improvement by adding citations to reliable sources and that unverifiable material may be challenged and removed.
This article cites 'Certificate Authority' and 'private key' that are both components that utilise a Key Ceremony to generate the root key that is used in/by a certificate authority and this root key has a private key.  I then cite the international standard SAS70 that is the set of rules and guidelines for conducting a key ceremony.
There should be no further requirement on my part to explain/cite references.  one of the reasons for writing this article is the destinct lack of resources and sources that are prepared to reveal the 'balck art' that is used when conducting a key ceremony.  I think Wikipedia should be delighted that we choose this medium to reveal hwo the whole process works.
So: I'm revealing industry 'secrets' here for the good of the community.  Getting references is simply not possible.
PReynolds-Wiki (talk) 13:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  References not possible 

message: I can find little in the real world (outside of Digi-Cert, the original author's employer, and ICANN, one of Digi-Cert's customers) concerning a so-called "key ceremony" and, frankly, I'm having a bit of trouble believing this is much more than an a publicity grab or an attempt to establish a sense of mystique around a rather mundane process because customers might just pay more for a "key ceremony" than they would for a few techies to generate a digital key pair for them. The simple fact of that matter is that, if verifiability cannot be established, the article must go away. Such is the way of things and the only mechanism that ensures the long-term viability of the encyclopedia. 
There are numerous examples of people creating WP articles and then using them as leverage to "get the ball rolling" toward creation of a term, or kickoff of a marketing campaign, or whatever. I find such schemes to be disingenuous, at best.
Anyone have any thoughts? — UncleBubba ( T @ C ) 04:46, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unverifiability 

message: The duplicated text at  displays a creation date of 14 February 2008 -- whereas the Wikipedia article was created one month earlier on 19 January 2008. The cited website is an apparent reverse copyright violation of Wikipedia. I have removed the copyyright violation template.  — CactusWriter (talk) 20:49, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Probable backwards copyvio

message: SAS 70 defines how audits of an service organization shall be organized etc. There are no IT-specific controls, and consequently no key management controls.
Same for the link to the Open Directory Project. The target page lists certificate authorities but does not provide a clue on key ceremonies.
Rhoerbe (talk) 06:59, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  SAS 70 does not define controls 

message: I'm a professional cryptographer at 'one of those places' that hires cryptographers outside of academia, and PKI/hybrid cryptosystem SME (and former Wikipedian/sysop, 10 years retired) and this article:
1. Needs a rewrite
2. Is tagged inappropriately for improvements:
   2.1 SAS70 has to do with audit; I am *entirely unfamiliar* with SAS70 prescribing anything to do with igniting a PKI or assigning roles to PEDs on HSMs or KMSes: the PED roles determine the key ceremony process, SAS70 is for 'grey PED' auditors. A Google search shows one site mentioning a connection, and everything else seems to reference either it (Digi-sign.com) or this article. 
    2.2 There is not much public information on the key ceremony because it's an open secret among the PKI and applied cryptography communities, and not widely shared with outsiders (security through obscurity, though a key ceremony is essentially impossible to subvert unless you have multiple key persons in positions of trust in the security team at a given company).
3. Is unclear and contains some factually incorrect information about crypto details and the difference between keys, certificates, and their infrastructures.
Etc.
I intend to undertake a full rewrite in the coming weeks and remember enough about Wikipedia standards to post here first. I'm solely on mobile so will not likely be checking this page often. St John Chrysostom Δόξατω Θεώ 05:53, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite