[removing Cc: tahoe-dev as this subthread is not about Tahoe-LAFS.
Of course, the subscribers to tahoe-dev would probably be interested
in this subthread, but that just goes to show that they ought to
subscribe to cryptogra...@metzdowd.com.]
On Monday,2009-08-10, at 11:56 , Jason Resch wro
Alexander Klimov wrote:
> A problem with this reasoning is that the physical world and the usual
> digital computers have exponential simulation gap (it is known at
> least in one direction: to simulate N entangled particles on a digital
> computer one needs computations exponential in N). This ca
"James A. Donald" writes:
> > [In order to implement strong password based
> > encryption and authentication] on the server side,
> > we need a request object in the script language that
> > tells the script that this request comes from an
> > entity that established a secure connection using
> >
On Aug 11, 2009, at 2:47 PM, Hal Finney wrote:
[Note subject line change]
Jerry Leichter writes:
Since people do keep bringing up Moore's Law in an attempt to justify
larger keys our systems "stronger than cryptography," it's worth
keeping in mind that we are approaching fairly deep physical l
On Aug 10, 2009, at 4:42 AM, Alexander Klimov wrote:
On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, Jerry Leichter wrote:
Since people do keep bringing up Moore's Law in an attempt to justify
larger keys our systems "stronger than cryptography," it's worth
keeping in mind that we are approaching fairly deep physical limi
[Note subject line change]
Jerry Leichter writes:
> Since people do keep bringing up Moore's Law in an attempt to justify
> larger keys our systems "stronger than cryptography," it's worth
> keeping in mind that we are approaching fairly deep physical limits.
> I wrote about this on this li
Thomas Hardjono wrote:
> I'm not sure if the Chrome folks would be prepared to
> ship their browser without any CA certs loaded,
Excessive distrust is inconvenient, excessive trust is
vulnerable. It is better to remedy flaws by expanding
functionality rather than restricting it.
On the one hand
>
> From: James A. Donald [jam...@echeque.com]
> Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 1:21 AM
> To: Thomas Hardjono
> Cc: Ben Laurie; Cryptography
> Subject: Re: Client Certificate UI for Chrome?
>
> Thomas Hardjono wrote:
> > In this UI discussion, I think its