-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 29 Sep 1999, William H. Geiger III wrote:
> >If you do not trust the crypto processor then you should throw the whole
> >machine out - there are *so* many other ways that IBM could have
> >compromised the system.
>
> So you suggest the head in the sand approach? There are so many different
> ways a system can be compromised so we will just ignore them all? Surely
> you are not naive enough to blindly trust someone's crypto black box just
> because they say it's secure?
Surely you are not naive enough to blindly trust someone's black
box of a CPU just because they say it is not contain trapdoors?
This applies even more so for operating systems. Have you audited
every line of Warp 4.0? Of course not, but you are willing to rant
about the alleged insecurity of a crypto chip by the very same vendor.
You don't see the inconsistency?
Regards,
Damien Miller
- --
| "Bombay is 250ms from New York in the new world order" - Alan Cox
| Damien Miller - http://www.ilogic.com.au/~dmiller
| Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) -or- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE38t6QormJ9RG1dI8RAguOAKCa5hMRymU0i+dq31qR/Vseobmc8gCfegXY
80q/C5xn1dVVDcBNoSJ4yoU=
=8iQs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
