In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Matt Crawford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The (now expired) RSA patent number, 4,405,829, is prime.
>
>It would be interesting to suppose they finagled for that, but the
>odds are a fairly decent 1-in-15 or so of it happening by chance.
It of course would have be
--- begin forwarded text
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 15:57:12 -0500 (EST)
From: Chris Wysopal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: New book on encryption technology vs. NSA from Steven Levy, autho
r of Hackers (fwd)
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Chris Wysopal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>In response, Peacefire has released a bypass program -- eponymously named
>"Peacefire" -- which can disable all popular Windows blocking software
>(Cyber Patrol, SurfWatch, Net Nanny, CYBERsitter, X-Stop, Cyber Snoop,
>PureSight) with the click of a button. The program is available at
> ht
Dear Cypherpunks readers,
I wanted to let you know that Stefan Brands's thesis has been published in book form by MIT Press. The title is Rethinking Public Key Infrastructures and Digital Certificates: Building in Privacy. For more information please visit http://mitpress.mit.edu/promotions/book
--- Forwarded Message
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 05:00:09 -0800
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Bennett Haselton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: universal censorware-bypass program
[You are receiving this after signing up for membership in Peacefire at
http://www.peacefire.org/join/. To unsubscribe yo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
David Wagner wrote:
> History shows that it is extremely easy to propose schemes for
> encryption-with-integrity that are plausible-looking yet nonetheless
> entirely broken. At this point, I don't think I would trust very much
> a proposal without a proof.
>
At 10:06 AM 11/29/00 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>You have to agree that the "not using patented algorithms" thing
>solves the problem once and for all, if in a somewhat Gordian way
>(partly breaking backwards compatibility). We would never had any
>problems if not for PGP screwing it up -- b
Derek Atkins wrote:
> It's not snake oil if you can possibly produce it. There are plenty
> of "electronic voting" (read: NOT internet voting) systems that are
> "foolproof, secure, simple to operate", so the question is whether you
> can make it affordable. This is not selling a product, it'
> The (now expired) RSA patent number, 4,405,829, is prime.
It would be interesting to suppose they finagled for that, but the
odds are a fairly decent 1-in-15 or so of it happening by chance.
Hi All,
Has Jim Gillogly ever written an article USMA's "Cryptologia" on his
solutions to the CIA's "Kryptos" sculpture cryptogram? If so, which issue?
Thanks.
Regards,
S. Clive
David Wagner wrote:
>
> Enzo Michelangeli wrote:
> >OpenPGP tries to detect such "wrong key" situations for
> >symmetrically-encrypted packets in a pretty simplistic way, [...]
> > The repetition of 16 bits in the 80 bits of random data prefixed to
> > the message allows the receiver to immed
It's not snake oil if you can possibly produce it. There are plenty
of "electronic voting" (read: NOT internet voting) systems that are
"foolproof, secure, simple to operate", so the question is whether you
can make it affordable. This is not selling a product, it's selling a
project goal. Ther
12 matches
Mail list logo
