-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 09:27:07PM -0700, Tim May wrote:
> At 8:50 PM -0700 10/16/00, Nathan Saper wrote:
> >
> >On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 08:12:53PM -0700, Tim May wrote:
> >
> >  >
> >>  What is the basis for this claim about the NSA having such expertise
> >>  and technology? Paranoia, ESP, cluelessness, or actual knowledge?
> >>
> >
> >Speculation, nothing more.  Notice the "IMHO" above.  I'm not claiming
> >to be stating facts.
> 
> I asked you to provide some _basis_ for your claim, not to quibble 
> about "not claiming to be stating facts."

Fine.  My basis for my claim is that the NSA is the best funded and
best equiped electronic intelligence agency in the world, and they
have employed some of the smartest people in the world.

> >
> >Most crypto algorithms are mathematically sound.  I'm not worried
> >about the NSA finding some miraculous way to factor large numbers.
> >I'm worried about the NSA discovering security bugs in crypto tools.
> 
> Recall that your precise words were:
> 
> "IMHO, the NSA has enough expertise and technology to crack just about
> any cipher out there."

Fine, I'm guilty of not adequately proofreading my emails.  Sue me.

> 
> This is a claim about _ciphers_, a claim often made by the clueless. 
> ("Any cipher can be broken...," "The NSA has more than enough 
> computer power...," are the most common variants.)

Fine, it's a claim made by the clueless.  I'm not claiming to be
something other than clueless, but I am claiming to have not meant
what I sent to this list.  Again, not a good proofreader.  Again, sue me.

> 
> You are a twit.

You know me only from about 4 posts to this list.  Hardly evidence
enough to evaluate my qualification as a twit.

Get off your fucking high horse.

> 
> 

- -- 
Nathan Saper ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | http://www.well.com/user/natedog/
GnuPG (ElGamal/DSA): 0x9AD0F382 | PGP 2.x (RSA): 0x386C4B91
Standard PGP & PGP/MIME OK      | AOL Instant Messenger: linuxfu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE569ln2FWyBZrQ84IRAgnoAJ9FYhZmiQY+tSI7Mu2ap0XzazQcVwCfQYl9
i9Vj1AtUfv4teJS8PtoJfjo=
=Ru39
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to