Steve Bellovin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Have you ever wondered what CA a spy agency would trust? In the case of the
Mossad, it's Thawte.
Minor nitpick: That should really be phrased as Have you ever wondered what
CA a spy agency would select to make the browser warning dialogs go away?.
Peter Parker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In one of the issue of ijde found at
http://www.ijde.org/docs/04_winter_v2i3_art1.pdf the authors have analysed
various encryption applications and discussed results for few sample
applications. Does any one have the complete results. Tried mailing the
Why worry about satellites when car/plane/neighbor unpiloted remote
controlled airplanes work so well?
You're free-radiating electronic emissions. That's all a determined
adversary needs. Or an opportunistic war-driving script-kiddie, for
that matter.
John Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5/27/2004
Anton Stiglic [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think cryptography techniques can provide a partial solution to spam.
No they won't. All the ones I've seen are some variant on the build a big
wall around the Internet and only let the good guys in, which will never work
because the Internet doesn't
At 09:27 AM 5/28/2004, Peter Gutmann wrote:
No they won't. All the ones I've seen are some variant on the build a big
wall around the Internet and only let the good guys in, which will never work
because the Internet doesn't contain any definable inside and outside, only
800 million Manchurian
On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 10:07:43AM -0400, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
yahoo draft internet standard for using DNS as a public key server
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-delany-domainkeys-base-00.txt
The main problem with this approach is revealed in a mind slip by Yahoo
themselves at
R. A. Hettinga
At 12:35 PM -0400 5/27/04, John Kelsey wrote:
Does anyone know whether the low-power nature of wireless
LANs protects
them from eavesdropping by satellite?
It seems to me that you'd need a pretty big dish in orbit to
get that kind
of resolution.
The Keyholes(?) are
Trei, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I suspect that eavesdropping on 802.11b/g from
orbit is pretty hard. The power levels are very
low, and there may be several nets running on the same
channel within a satellites' antenna footprint.
As I mentioned, phased arrays are very good at
At 9:19 PM -0400 5/27/04, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
R. A. Hettinga [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 12:35 PM -0400 5/27/04, John Kelsey wrote:
Does anyone know whether the low-power nature of wireless LANs protects
them from eavesdropping by satellite?
It seems to me that you'd need a pretty big dish
Don't dismiss possibilities for wireless data eavesdropping without
considering the possibilities of this new chip
http://pr.caltech.edu/media/Press_Releases/PR12490.html
and its friends
http://www.chic.caltech.edu/
-
The
On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 09:46:03AM -0700, bear wrote:
Spam won't stop until spam costs the spammers money.
If I'm a node in a web of trust (FOAF is a human), prestige will
percolate through it completely. That way I can color a whole domain with a
nonboolean trust hue, while a domain of fakers
On Fri, 28 May 2004, Ed Gerck wrote:
The main problem with this approach is revealed in a mind slip by Yahoo
themselves at http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys :
For consumers, such as Yahoo! Mail users or a grandmother accessing email
through a small mid-western ISP, industry support
On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 01:19:15PM -0500, Matt Crawford wrote:
Don't dismiss possibilities for wireless data eavesdropping without
considering the possibilities of this new chip
http://pr.caltech.edu/media/Press_Releases/PR12490.html
and its friends
http://www.chic.caltech.edu/
If you
On Fri, May 28, 2004 at 03:20:52PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
How soon will the spammers get into the business of hosting free mailboxes
for people who actually buy spamvertized products. Much easier to send the
spam to their own users, let them indicate their preferences, set up
On Fri, 28 May 2004, Anne Lynn Wheeler wrote:
connecting systems that were designed for fundamentally safe and isolated
environment to wide-open anarchy hostile operation exposes all sorts of
problems. somewhat analogous to not actually needing a helmet for riding a
motorcycle ... or seat
also sprach Ed Gerck [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004.05.28.1853 +0200]:
It's industry support. We know what it means: multiple,
conflicting approaches, slow, fragmented adoption -- will not
work. It would be better if the solution does NOT need industry
support at all, only user support. It should use
16 matches
Mail list logo
