At 08:57 PM 10/30/01 -0500, vertigo commended to our attention:
http://theory.lcs.mit.edu/~rivest/chaffing.txt
Here is a review I wrote back in 1998:
1) In Ron's note, most of the statements about the technology are true. In
a narrowly technical sense the scheme would work.
2) The scheme is
At 11:21 PM 9/16/01 -0400, P.J. Ponder wrote:
Senator Hatch was interviewed by national media on Tuesday and stated that
the US government had voice intercepts of calls talking about success with
two targets. He was later criticized for talking about the intercepts.
Hm, criticized? Why not
At 01:25 PM 9/17/01 -0500, Matt Crawford wrote:
Somehow I doubt that it was not a speech or debate in the senate.
And what is the basis for this doubt?
All evidence, including that which I quoted in my original message,
indicates that he first said it in a media interview. Here is some more
At 06:58 PM 9/16/01 +0200, Axel H Horns wrote:
During the
past years I managed to convince a handful of clients and colleagues
to make use of PGP in order to protect confidential information when
sending e-mail messages.
Of course, if PGP would be banned in Germany by some legislation I
would
I wrote:
First, it should be obvious that They don't need a submarine to tap cables
that already make landfall in the US, which is the vast majority:
Then at 07:33 PM 6/1/01 +0100, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
Of course they have reasons to want to
tap cables that make landfall in the US.
1) I
At 10:39 AM 5/29/01 -0400, Matt Blaze wrote:
While I agree in principle that plaintext with a high information content
probably makes it harder to mount a ciphertext-only attack against most
(non-randomized, at least) secret-key cryptosystems, I'm not at all
convinced that the security benefits
