On Sun, 3 Dec 2006 20:26:07 -0500
Thor Lancelot Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 05:15:02PM -0500, John Ioannidis wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 10:21:57AM -0500, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
Quoting:
The FBI appears to have begun using a novel form of
At 10:21 AM 12/2/2006 -0500, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
Quoting:
The FBI appears to have begun using a novel form of electronic
surveillance in criminal investigations: remotely activating a
mobile phone's microphone and using it to eavesdrop on nearby
conversations.
The
Thor Lancelot Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's been a while since I built ISDN equipment but I do not think this is
correct: can you show me how, exactly, one uses Q.931 to instruct the other
endpoint to go off-hook?
You make use of the undocumented remote management interface [0].
Peter.
On 12/3/06, Thor Lancelot Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's been a while since I built ISDN equipment but I do not think this
is correct: can you show me how, exactly, one uses Q.931 to instruct the
other endpoint to go off-hook?
That's the same question I have. I don't remember seeing
On Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 09:26:15PM -0600, Taral wrote:
That's the same question I have. I don't remember seeing anything in
the GSM standard that would allow this either.
I'll hazard a guess: mobile providers can send a special type of
message (not sure if it would be classed as an SMS) with
Compared to AES-128, AES-256 is 140% of the rounds to encrypt 200% as much
data. So when implemented in hardware, AES-256 is substantially faster.
Excuse me, AES-256 has the same block size as AES-128, that is 128 bits.
It's in fact slower, not faster, and in hardware it also occupies a
On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, David Johnston wrote:
Moreover, AES-256 is 20-ish percent slower than AES-128.
Compared to AES-128, AES-256 is 140% of the rounds to encrypt 200% as
much data. So when implemented in hardware, AES-256 is substantially faster.
AES-256 means AES with 128-bit block and
David Johnston wrote:
Jon Callas wrote:
Moreover, AES-256 is 20-ish percent slower than AES-128.
Compared to AES-128, AES-256 is 140% of the rounds to encrypt 200% as
much data. So when implemented in hardware, AES-256 is substantially
faster.
AES-256 does not encrypt any more data per
Leichter, Jerry wrote:
| Jon Callas wrote:
|
|
| Moreover, AES-256 is 20-ish percent slower than AES-128.
| Compared to AES-128, AES-256 is 140% of the rounds to encrypt 200% as much
| data.
AES-256 has a 256-bit key but exactly the same 128-bit block as AES-128
(and AES-192, for that
