Re: House committee ditches SAFE for law enforcement version

I'm going to sleep soon so let me try a short answer... The House Rules committee decides what legislation will go to the House floor, what amendments will be in order, and in what sequence they will be presented (which is often very important). The House Rules committee is in a practice an exten

Re: depleting the random number generator

In article , Arnold G. Reinhold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One nice advantage of using RC4 as a nonce generator is that you can easily > switch back and forth between key setup and code byte generation. You can > even do both at the same time. (There is no

Re: House committee ditches SAFE for law enforcement version

Procedurally, what does he need to do to make this happen? Can any member of the house do it? Can the Speaker do this on his own, does it require a vote of the rules committee, the full house, or what? Also, the Supremes often use legislative history when making rulings. Wha

Re: "If only you knew what we knew"

"James A. Donald" wrote: > > -- > >From time to time the spooks have a talk with various people about the > restrictions on cryptography, and those people stop opposing the > restrictions, and tell us "if only you knew what we knew" i.e. how much dirt the spooks have on them :-) Cheers, Be

Re: House committee ditches SAFE for law enforcement version

Declan McCullagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> The sponsor of yesterday's amendment, Rep. Weldon, said that he wants to >> have a classified briefing //on the House floor// to scare members into >> voting his way. Look for killer amendments to SAFE to be offered during >> that floor vote, perhap

Re: depleting the random number generator

At 8:35 AM -0700 7/21/99, James A. Donald wrote: >-- >At 09:24 PM 7/19/99 +0100, Ben Laurie wrote: >> So what you are saying is that you'd be happy to run your server >> forever on an inital charge of 128 bits of entropy and no more >> randomness ever? > >Yes, though I would probably prefer an