On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 13:06, Perry E. Metzger <pe...@piermont.com> wrote:

> The video was apparently intentionally given to Wikileaks, so one can't
> imagine that the releasing parties would have wanted it to be unreadable
> by them (or that any reasonable modern cryptosystem would have be
> crackable). What, then, does the "decryption" claim mean here. Does
> anyone know? <majord...@metzdowd.com>

This site http://leaks.telecomix.org/ claims to have the original,
unencrypted video. It appears to have been encrypted with OpenSSL given the
Salted__ prefix.

Thomas Coppi
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majord...@metzdowd.com

Reply via email to