> Or you might not because it was based on a stupid thinking error on my > side. Let's make it "a chance of 1 in 2^128", which could be the chance > of you trying a symmetric encryption key and actually being right about it.
I'm glad you made the correction: that error was sooooo profound. :) (For those not up on their large-number theory: the difference is insignificant. Peter's correction was made in a spirit of utterly pedantic attention to detail [a spirit I share!], not because it mattered.) _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
