James Ellis, GCHQ, in his account of the development of non-secret
encryption credits a Bell Laboratories 1944 report on Project
C-43 for stimulating his conception:
http://www.cesg.gov.uk/publications/media/nsecret/possnse.pdf
The Possibility of Secure Non-Secret Digital Encryption
J. H.
John Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
James Ellis, GCHQ, in his account of the development of non-secret
encryption credits a Bell Laboratories 1944 report on Project
C-43 for stimulating his conception:
http://www.cesg.gov.uk/publications/media/nsecret/possnse.pdf
The URL above does not
David,
A reasonable question would be Why don't all the PKS operators
replace their server with SKS or something else?. I don't have a
good answer to that. It's certainly been asked.[3]
...and has been answered a number of times. The thing is (and most people
seem to forget about this now
John Young wrote:
James Ellis, GCHQ, in his account of the development of non-secret
encryption credits a Bell Laboratories 1944 report on Project
C-43 for stimulating his conception:
However the concept seems familiar enough - unless I am missing something, a
PRNG (n for noise rather than
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 03:47:01PM +0200, Stefan Kelm wrote:
David,
A reasonable question would be Why don't all the PKS operators
replace their server with SKS or something else?. I don't have a
good answer to that. It's certainly been asked.[3]
...and has been answered a number of
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], John Young writes:
Related: We have a three-year-old FOIA request to NSA for
information on:
The invention, discovery and development of non-secret
encryption (NSE) and public key cryptography (PKC) by
United Kingdom, United States, or any other nation's
also sprach David Shaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.06.18.0240 +0200]:
The problem is that the PKS keyserver was not written to handle keys
with multiple subkeys.
[snip]
Thanks for the explanation. I didn't know about subkeys.pgp.net yet.
Moreover, I second the belief that the keyservers must be
