-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
*/Reply
Sunday, May 28, 2000, 2:05:08 AM, you wrote:
NA> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
NA> Hash: SHA1
NA> On Saturday, May 27, 2000, 4:52:37 PM, Christian Dysthe wrote:
CD>> Ummmm.....why is that? Isn't PGP..eh..PGP? I mean isn't a 1024 key
just as
CD>> secure implemented in The Bat! as used from an external application? I
am
CD>> not expert, maybe I have missed something?
NA> Well, for one thing, I don't believe the internal implementation allows
NA> for use of anything other than RSA Keys. The question then remains:
Which
NA> algorithms are stronger... RSA or DH/DSS? In practise, RSA Keys seem to
be
NA> more vulnerable, and the reasons can be found here:
RSA old style keys are much more vulnerable. I've got a v.usefull
screensaver that brute force crack 512 bit RSA keys overnight :-)
External PGP is free and simple and can be used to digitally sign
everything. Or encrypt strange files <g>.
From
Jamie
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
22:00:16 30 May 2000
//Insert comment here
Windows 98 4.10 Build 1998
The Bat 1.44
- --
Jamie mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2i
Comment: Jamie Dainton - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
iQA/AwUBOTQsPvwQejftkdBIEQI5yQCeNtZEmy4OjDM/vKFIjR20934XNcMAn38L
uPRrcIJy5bsaHdk3I0r+yS8k
=aDK3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
