On 17 Jan 2014, at 17.30, Christian Weisgerber <na...@mips.inka.de> wrote: > > As guenther@ has pointed out, refusing all crypto covered by that > definition is silly. But even if you limit yourself to the > specification part, you should be very disappointed about the newly > added Curve25519 key exchange and Ed25519 signing in OpenSSH, because > as implemented both rely on SHA-2 cryptographic hashes, which were > not only specified by NIST, but in fact designed by the NSA. > > Of course mainstream cryptographers don't think that SHA-2 is > insecure, much less backdoored, but that again raises the question: > What do mean by that "NIST crypto" you want to avoid? > > -- > Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de >
Hi, Consider for a moment the difference between objective thinking and objective feeling, then you might consider my point of view. You are right, mere involvement has not tainted reality. But it has left me suspicious, and that’s something that needs to be satisfied. It’s a fuzzy logic, and it wasn’t enough to get me past the doorman in the Umverschämft. -mike
