I agree up to a point. There are literlly millions of people out there who
are neither gurus nor programmers. These people rely on someone else (like
you or like Microsoft or ___?____) to tell them what is good & what is safe.
Who ARE you going to trust?? Their only alternative would be to stop using
computers. (not an option,really) Even programmers can not really tell if
proprietary code is safe. Contrary to what Ben said, 50 thousand lines of
undocumented, uncommented assembly code is "unknowable". And also no, I
repeat, NO dis-assembler is 100% accurate due to coding errors, use of
undocumented & unsupported code, unstructured programming etc.
The problem with computers is they always do what I TELL them to do
instead of what I WANT them to do. LP :)
*-----Original Message-----
*From: mouss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
*Sent: Monday, December 04, 2000 11:32 AM
*To: Larry Paul; Bernd Eckenfels
*Cc: firewalls_list
*Subject: RE: Ben's Big Crypto Flamefest
*
*
*While this might seem perfect, it is silly in my opinion.
*If a company trying to make a thing harder happens to
*make it easy, then I have no trust in the company, and
*the doubts I've had on keys I'll have on algorithms.
*
*The problem with MS and others is that given that crypto is
*a "niverqla"' science and that there are so many open studies,
*there is no justification of a "closed" product that does crypto.
*so what I ask MS is not to provide me wit a way to encrypt my data, but
*with a way to enable me to use their products with my encryption software.
*and that's where they fail to give me a answer.
*
*MS, Checkpoint and others are no encryption experts, so I don't want
*them to encrypt any data of mine, as I don't want them to controll
*my fridge,
*my TV, ... They claim to provide easy to use software? so, why do anything
*else, that's enough if it is ver true (which I doubt).
*
*The only motivation behind any encryption software from these companies is
*that they work for unfriendly organizations such as the NSA/MOSSAD/whatever
*[claim: mouss and his moussad has no relation with the mossad. a
*'u' is a big
*thing!]
*
*I only want this: APIs to do what I want, not what they want...
*
*
*cheers,
*mouss
*
*
*
*
*At 14:23 01/12/00 -0600, Larry Paul wrote:
*
*>This now makes sense. If the NSA can replace the key, anyone can
*and hence
*>strengthen their security. For example: only A and B have the
*same embedded
*>key & can communicate securly. Is this correct?
*
*
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
