Cryptography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for software developers, mathematicians and others interested in cryptography. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

What are well respected Cryptographic Timestamping authorities utilizing more sophisticated than just PKI (RFC 3161) schemes, like Linked, Linked and signed, distributed hash trees (maybe P2P?), hybrid ?

Is there any good resource (better than googling, what does not give information about how well service is respected).

I would love to use Keyless Signatures (different thank PKI schemes), preferably remaining reliable if PKI would be compromised (e.g. Linked and signed, distributed, hybrid, etc).

I know about such interesting approach: http://www.guardtime.com/signatures/technology-overview/ , but I would like to used a few (for better reliability - to achieve tens of years reliability) different approaches.

Preferably those well respected timestamps to be legally respected (e.g. Securo "Conforms to EU and US federal standards)

share|improve this question

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.
{"cc_re__cc_re__cc_by_sa_3_0": ["                    <li><a href=\"//area51.stackexchange.com\" title=\"proposing new sites in the Stack Exchange network\">Area 51</a></li>\r\n                        <li><a href=\"//careers.stackoverflow.com\">Stack Overflow Careers</a></li>\r\n                    \r\n                </ol>\r\n            </td>\r\n    </tr>\r\n</table>\r\n                </div>\r\n            </div>\r\n            <div id=\"copyright\">\r\n                site design / logo &#169; 2016 Stack Exchange Inc; user contributions licensed under <a href=\"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/\" rel=\"license\">cc by-sa 3.0</a> \r\n                with <a href=\"http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/\" rel=\"license\">attribution required</a>\r\n            </div>\r\n            <div id=\"svnrev\">\r\n                rev 2016.5.26.3618\r\n            </div>\r\n        </div>\r\n    </div>\r\n    <noscript>\r\n        <div id=\"noscript-warning\">Cryptography Stack Exchange works best with JavaScript enabled<img src=\"http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-c1rF4kxgLUzNc.gif\" alt=\"\" class=\"dno\"></div>\r\n    </nosc"], "copyright__copyright__copyright": ["ng approach: http://www.guardtime.com/signatures/technology-overview/ , but I would like to used a few (for better reliability - to achieve tens of years reliability) different approaches.\n\nPreferably those well respected timestamps to be legally respected (e.g. Securo \"Conforms to EU and US federal standards)\n\nshare|improve this question\n\nYour Answer\n\n\u00a0\ndiscard\n\nBy posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.\n\nBrowse other questions tagged or ask your own question."]}