On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 08:58:25PM -0400, Thierry Moreau wrote:
The DNS root may be qualified as a high valued zone, but I made the
effort to put in writing some elements of a risk analysis (I have an
aversion for this notion as I build *IT*controls* and the consultants are
hired to
At 11:31 AM -0400 4/20/10, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
I wonder why it is that, in spite of almost universal disinterest in
the
security community, quantum key distribution continues to be a subject
of active technological development.
Paul Hoffman wrote:
You hit it: almost. As long as a few
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Perry E. Metzger pe...@piermont.com wrote:
Via /., I saw the following article on ever higher speed QKD:
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2010-04/19/super-secure-data-encryption-gets-faster.aspx
Very interesting physics, but quite useless in the real
silky michaelsli...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Perry E. Metzger pe...@piermont.com wrote:
Via /., I saw the following article on ever higher speed QKD:
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2010-04/19/super-secure-data-encryption-gets-faster.aspx
Very interesting
On 21-04-2010 02:40, Victor Duchovni wrote:
EC definitely has practical merit. Unfortunately the patent issues around
protocols using EC public keys are murky.
Neither RSA nor EC come with complexity proofs.
While EC (by that I assume you mean ECDSA) does not have a formal
security proof,
silky michaelsli...@gmail.com writes:
First of all, I'm sure you know more about this than me, but allow me
to reply ...
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 11:19 PM, Perry E. Metzger pe...@piermont.com wrote:
Useless now maybe, but it's preparing for a world where RSA is broken
(i.e. quantum
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 10:47 AM, Perry E. Metzger pe...@piermont.com wrote:
[...]
Second, you can't use QKD on a computer network. It is strictly point to
point. Want 200 nodes to talk to each other? Then you need 40,000
fibers, without repeaters, in between the nodes, each with a $10,000 or
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Perry E. Metzger pe...@piermont.com wrote:
No one is doing that, though. People are working on things like faster
bit rates, as though the basic reasons the whole thing is useless were
solved.
I don't think you can legitimately speak for the entire
Let me note that Mr. Leiseboer is the CTO of a company that makes QKD
equipment.
John Leiseboer jleiseb...@bigpond.com writes:
I too once worked exclusively in the world of classical cryptography and
was sceptical of QKD. I now work in both worlds - classical cryptography
and QKD. I now know
silky michaelsli...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Perry E. Metzger pe...@piermont.com wrote:
No one is doing that, though. People are working on things like faster
bit rates, as though the basic reasons the whole thing is useless were
solved.
I don't think you
10 matches
Mail list logo
