Stupid question I'm sure, but does TLS's anonymous DH protect against
man-in-the-middle attacks? If so, how? I cannot figure out how it would,
and it would seem TLS would be wide open to abuse without MITM protection so
I cannot imagine it would be acceptable practice without some form of
security
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 02:24:00PM -0400, Ian Grigg wrote:
> Matt Blaze wrote:
> >
> > > I imagine the Plumbers & Electricians Union must have used similar
> > > arguments to enclose the business to themselves, and keep out unlicensed
> > > newcomers. "No longer acceptable" indeed. Too much compe
On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 06:26:16PM -0700, Joseph Ashwood wrote:
>
> > Truncated MAC
> > tinc will continue to use only the first 32 bits by default.
> Simply put this is unacceptable from a security standpoint. The view taken
> is that the extra 128 bits represents a significant overhead in the
>
<http://www.cisc.gc.ca/AnnualReport2003/Cisc2003/executive2003.html>
Technology and Crime
<http://www.cisc.gc.ca/AnnualReport2003/Cisc2003/technology2003.html>
--
M Taylor
http://www.mctaylor.com/
-
The Cryptography Mailin
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 12:19:54PM -0700, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> tom st denis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > My logic is that if you're going to create something new, it should
> > > be better than what already exists. There is precious little
> > > evidence that libtomnet fills that bill.
>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 14:00:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: Russell McOrmond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: General Copyright Discussions <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I have not had a chance to read this yet, but just referencing it in
case others did not notice it yet.
Date on file is Date modified: 2003/06/04
Jus
