hi,
> > The government knows exactly what it's doing. It
> wants to discourage the use of encryption by any
> means necessary, because of sheer numbers.
Does n't govt intervension always increase the
numbers?
> > Basically, the more messages that are encypted,
> the more hardware (and therefore
Not only is EM correct, but:
* many attacks are possible without worrying about keylength. Got
Scarfo?
* NIST/NSA picked the lamest AES. If I told you what "lame" meant, I'd
have to kill you.
* (Lack of) User motivation (related to man-machine issues) is still the
spooks' best friend. As
well a
On Wednesday, October 9, 2002, at 07:28 PM, anonimo arancio wrote:
> This relates to an issue I've wanted to discuss with "Cypherpunks" for
> several years.
> Over the years, I've seen several commentators (including Timothy May)
> appear suprised when discussing the US's encryption export pol
On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 02:28:26AM -, anonimo arancio wrote:
[..]
> But I am wondering if Cypherpunks have mentioned the 'obvious'.
>
> The government knows exactly what it's doing. It wants to discourage the use of
>encryption by any means necessary, because of sheer numbers.
> Basically,
This relates to an issue I've wanted to discuss with "Cypherpunks" for several years.
Over the years, I've seen several commentators (including Timothy May) appear suprised
when discussing the US's encryption export policies.
The basic argument is that, if good encryption is available overseas or
These folks seem to be subbing for JY while he's out :-)
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0210/S00061.htm
British Press Gagged Over MI6's #100,000 bin Laden
Wednesday, 9 October 2002, 10:24 am
Article: www.UnansweredQuestions.org
Unanswered Questions: Thinking For O
On Wednesday, October 9, 2002, at 07:28 PM, anonimo arancio wrote:
> The basic argument is that, if good encryption is available overseas
> or easily downloadable, it doesn't make sense to make export of it
> illegal.
Nope. The biggest name in software right now is Microsoft, who wasn't
willing t
"I assume everyone knows the little arrangement that lotus
reached with the NSA over its encrypted secure email?"
I'm new here, so do tell if I am wrong. Are you referring to the two levels
of Encryption available in Bogus Notes? (ie, the North American and the
International, the International
"B"
--Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos---
+ ^ + :NSA got $20Bil/year |Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\
\|/ :and didn't stop 9-11|share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\
<--*-->:Instead of rewarding|monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\
> British Press Gagged Over MI6's #100,000 bin Laden
> Wednesday, 9 October 2002, 10:24 am
> Article: www.UnansweredQuestions.org
> ...
> I first noticed that the Guardian article I had earlier posted on
> my website had
> disappeared. Already aware that Blair may well have ordere
>> "I assume everyone knows the little arrangement that lotus
>> reached with the NSA over its encrypted secure email?"
> I'm new here, so do tell if I am wrong. Are you referring to the two
levels
> of Encryption available in Bogus Notes?
More or less, yes. Lotus knew nobody would buy a 40 bit ve
Bill Stewart wrote:
> Somebody backdoored the source code for Sendmail on the official server.
> So if you recompile from scratch, your sendmail is 0wned.
> Another reason not to run mail systems as root
In this case, as I understand it, it bites when you compile. So, its
another reason not
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 11:01:21PM +0100, Ben Laurie wrote:
> Bill Stewart wrote:
> > Somebody backdoored the source code for Sendmail on the official server.
> > So if you recompile from scratch, your sendmail is 0wned.
> > Another reason not to run mail systems as root
>
> In this case, as
13 matches
Mail list logo
