On Mon, 4 Dec 2000, William Allen Simpson wrote: > We could use the excuse of AES implementation to foster a move to a > new common denominator. AES is silly without an equivalently good secure hash function, which we don't have right now. [SHA-2 looks pretty good. What's your problem with it? --Perry] We already have too many common denominators. I'm waiting for something to stop looking like an experiment to actually start advocating use of a particular crypto application. -Bram Cohen
- Re: Is PGP broken? Bill Stewart
- Re: Is PGP broken? Ben Laurie
- Re: Is PGP broken? Peter Gutmann
- Re: Is PGP broken? Enzo Michelangeli
- Re: Is PGP broken? Ben Laurie
- Re: Is PGP broken? Russell Nelson
- Re: Is PGP broken? Ralf Senderek
- Re: Is PGP broken? Enzo Michelangeli
- Re: Is PGP broken? David Bird
- migration paradigm (was: Is PGP broken?) William Allen Simpson
- AES (was Re: migration paradigm) Bram Cohen
- AES (was Re: migration paradigm) Arnold G. Reinhold
- Re: migration paradigm (was: Is PGP br... Bram Cohen
- Re: migration paradigm (was: Is PG... Paulo S. L. M. Barreto
- Re: migration paradigm (was: Is PGP br... David Honig
- Re: migration paradigm (was: Is PG... David Wagner
- Re: migration paradigm (was: Is PG... Bram Cohen
- Re: migration paradigm (was: ... David Honig
- Re: migration paradigm (was: ... Paul Crowley
- Re: Is PGP broken? Ralf Senderek
- Re: Is PGP broken? Peter Gutmann