>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Crowley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Paul> The question is how attached we are to ssh-agent. It's very
Paul> cool but it's limiting in this regard. If we want to go
Paul> with it, it's a question of whether we can persuade it to
Paul> accept 256-bit q.
I came in late, but enhancing ssh-agent would be a good thing IMHO.
Whatever happens, I really like the model of ssh-agent - if an
attacker gets access to the ssh-agent socket, they cannot use this to
get access to the private key or password - so the damage is limited
to the duration they have access to the socket.
Unlike, say gnupg-agent which simply provides the password to whoever
asks for it (Years ago I heard rumours of a ssh-agent like system for
gnupg but I am not sure what happened...).
--
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
