On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Ian Grigg wrote:
I must be out of touch - since when did
PGP key signing require a photo id?
It does not. It is improper for a key-signing organizer to dictate signing
policy to individuals. When I wrote the Efficient Group Key Signing Method
paper[1], I specifically
work will serve as an example for
other like-minded programmers, who chose to give their time and code in
the name of free speech and privacy.
Len Sassaman
13 February 2003
San Francisco, CA
--
Janis's home page may be viewed here:
http://web.archive.org/web/20010927055328/disastry.dhs.org
On Sun, 26 Jan 2003, Matt Blaze wrote:
The tragic part is that there are alternatives. There are several
lock designs that turn out to resist this threat, including master
rings and bicentric locks. While these designs aren't perfect, they
I think it is worth pointing out that, while master
On 24 Jan 2003, David Wagner wrote:
If those locksmiths didn't publish the vulnerability, phooey on them.
Matt Blaze deserves full credit for being the first to publish.
I'm fairly certain this has been published in locksmithing journals
previously, though I would have to do some digging to
On Fri, 24 Jan 2003, Matt Blaze wrote:
I have no particular interest in seeing you eat crickets (and before
I went veggie I've eaten a few myself; taste like whatever they're
cooked in), but I've done it on Medecos; it's no problem.
Well, unfortunately I specified live, which probably
CodeCon 2.0 is the premier event in 2003 for the P2P, Cypherpunk, and
network/security application developer community. It is a workshop for
developers of real-world applications with working code and active
development projects.
CodeCon registration is $95; a $15 discount is available for
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
Dear Valued Customer,
[...]
The PGP technology and source code will remain under the control and
ownership of Network Associates. Other products that utilize this
encryption technology will remain a part of Network AssociatesÂ’
current product
