-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 24 November 2001 03:28 am, Johannes Weiss wrote:
> So, because of this my question is: Is 3des secure enough??
The putty website (search for it on google) has something to say about
the security of des algorithm, which AFAIK it doesn't su
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 26 November 2001 12:08 am, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote:
> I was not able to find references to the PuTTY author's opinion on
> the security of DES or 3DES on his web site, but I do know that PuTTY
> does support 3DES, if not DES.
I was thinking
On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 11:29:22PM -0600, Warren Turkal wrote:
>
> On Saturday 24 November 2001 03:28 am, Johannes Weiss wrote:
> > So, because of this my question is: Is 3des secure enough??
>
> The putty website (search for it on google) has something to say about
> the security of des algori
Hi All,
I have been considering changing our RealAudio broadcasts (on a NT box) over
to a linux box and have decided to go with a icecast server.
However, I noticed that the stable package is version 1.00. Version 1.3.8b2
and prior have a remote vunerability to execute code as the particular
UID/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 24 November 2001 03:28 am, Johannes Weiss wrote:
> So, because of this my question is: Is 3des secure enough??
The putty website (search for it on google) has something to say about
the security of des algorithm, which AFAIK it doesn't s
Hi All,
I have been considering changing our RealAudio broadcasts (on a NT box) over
to a linux box and have decided to go with a icecast server.
However, I noticed that the stable package is version 1.00. Version 1.3.8b2
and prior have a remote vunerability to execute code as the particular
UID
Noah L Meyerhans writes:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 09:04:59AM +0900, Howland, Curtis wrote:
>> While this may be whipping a greasy stain on the road, it is true
>> that 3DES was created "by the government" back when private
>> cryptology was difficult or unknown. I believe it is prudent to
>> cons
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 09:04:59AM +0900, Howland, Curtis wrote:
>
> While this may be whipping a greasy stain on the road, it is true that
> 3DES was created "by the government" back when private cryptology was
> difficult or unknown. I believe it is prudent to consider that it was
> allowed to b
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 09:04:59AM +0900, Howland, Curtis wrote:
>
> While this may be whipping a greasy stain on the road, it is true that
> 3DES was created "by the government" back when private cryptology was
> difficult or unknown. I believe it is prudent to consider that it was
> allowed to b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
OK, I've now been 24 hours without a hit, so I'm presuming I've got rid
of all the crawlers.
Thanks for all the help and advice from both lists.
Resume:
- - the openfind.com(.tw) 'bots don't respect the norobots conventions, so
your robots.txt is us
Is there a "drop from..." command as well? I much prefer simply
black-holing packets rather than giving back to the perp "I'm here, but
I know about you" data by "deny". Or is that what the Apache "deny"
does?
Curt-
-Original Message-
From: Christoph Moench-Tegeder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECT
While this may be whipping a greasy stain on the road, it is true that
3DES was created "by the government" back when private cryptology was
difficult or unknown. I believe it is prudent to consider that it was
allowed to be used because of practical cracking available to the crypto
experts.
I'm
Noah L Meyerhans writes:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 09:04:59AM +0900, Howland, Curtis wrote:
>> While this may be whipping a greasy stain on the road, it is true
>> that 3DES was created "by the government" back when private
>> cryptology was difficult or unknown. I believe it is prudent to
>> con
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 09:04:59AM +0900, Howland, Curtis wrote:
>
> While this may be whipping a greasy stain on the road, it is true that
> 3DES was created "by the government" back when private cryptology was
> difficult or unknown. I believe it is prudent to consider that it was
> allowed to
On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 09:04:59AM +0900, Howland, Curtis wrote:
>
> While this may be whipping a greasy stain on the road, it is true that
> 3DES was created "by the government" back when private cryptology was
> difficult or unknown. I believe it is prudent to consider that it was
> allowed to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
OK, I've now been 24 hours without a hit, so I'm presuming I've got rid
of all the crawlers.
Thanks for all the help and advice from both lists.
Resume:
- - the openfind.com(.tw) 'bots don't respect the norobots conventions, so
your robots.txt is u
Is there a "drop from..." command as well? I much prefer simply
black-holing packets rather than giving back to the perp "I'm here, but
I know about you" data by "deny". Or is that what the Apache "deny"
does?
Curt-
-Original Message-
From: Christoph Moench-Tegeder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECT
While this may be whipping a greasy stain on the road, it is true that
3DES was created "by the government" back when private cryptology was
difficult or unknown. I believe it is prudent to consider that it was
allowed to be used because of practical cracking available to the crypto
experts.
I'm
On Sun, 25 Nov 2001, Craig Small wrote:
> with me. 3.8.0 had some good but not essential fixes in it (for most
> people anyway). I just don't know how to do it.
Well, if you want to keep the version numbering, epochs are the only sane
way :(
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find th
On Sun, 25 Nov 2001, Craig Small wrote:
> with me. 3.8.0 had some good but not essential fixes in it (for most
> people anyway). I just don't know how to do it.
Well, if you want to keep the version numbering, epochs are the only sane
way :(
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find t
20 matches
Mail list logo
