On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 13:06, Perry E. Metzger <pe...@piermont.com> wrote:
> The video was apparently intentionally given to Wikileaks, so one can't > imagine that the releasing parties would have wanted it to be unreadable > by them (or that any reasonable modern cryptosystem would have be > crackable). What, then, does the "decryption" claim mean here. Does > anyone know? <majord...@metzdowd.com> > This site http://leaks.telecomix.org/ claims to have the original, unencrypted video. It appears to have been encrypted with OpenSSL given the Salted__ prefix. -- Thomas Coppi --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majord...@metzdowd.com
