RE: [303] If you're sick of crypto talk don't read this (fwd)

At 10:01 AM 4/17/02 -0400, Trei, Peter wrote: I'd argue that a nightmare scenario for the statists and snoops would be for commonly used applications to use crypto by default, ... This would make distinguishing interesting from uninteresting traffic much more difficult. If that app is a

RE: [303] If you're sick of crypto talk don't read this (fwd)

At 10:01 AM 4/17/02 -0400, Trei, Peter wrote: I'd argue that a nightmare scenario for the statists and snoops would be for commonly used applications to use crypto by default, ... This would make distinguishing interesting from uninteresting traffic much more difficult. If that app is a

[303] If you're sick of crypto talk don't read this (fwd)

Just to add to the saga... -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Forwarded message -- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 09:47:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Person [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [303] If you're sick of crypto talk don't read this Quote from

Re: [303] If you're sick of crypto talk don't read this (fwd)

On Tue, 16 Apr 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -- Forwarded message -- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 09:47:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Person [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [303] If you're sick of crypto talk don't read this Quote from

Re: [303] If you're sick of crypto talk don't read this (fwd)

What is peculiar about the rejoinders to Lucky's sensible proposal is the dismissal of it with elaborate affirmations of mathematical surety, as if there has not been voluminous warnings to never rely on mathematical surety when weaknesses are far more likely to be found in the faulty

Re: [303] If you're sick of crypto talk don't read this (fwd)

What is peculiar about the rejoinders to Lucky's sensible proposal is the dismissal of it with elaborate affirmations of mathematical surety, as if there has not been voluminous warnings to never rely on mathematical surety when weaknesses are far more likely to be found in the faulty

Re: [303] If you're sick of crypto talk don't read this (fwd)

Morlock wrote: So do not easily dismiss possibility that someone may not care about implementation vulnerabilities at all, as long as cyphertext is available. Agreed that there may well be ways to access cyphertext that does not attack its crypto-mathematical shield, which could indeed be

Re: [303] If you're sick of crypto talk don't read this (fwd)

at the time but perhaps others. One might imagine, in the paranoid spirit of good cryptologists, that the release was intended to divert attention away from X, for example, to encourage public trust in PK as with the Germans and Enigma. This is probably the sanest method of estimating

Re: [303] If you're sick of crypto talk don't read this (fwd)

What is peculiar about the rejoinders to Lucky's sensible proposal is the dismissal of it with elaborate affirmations of mathematical surety, as if there has not been voluminous warnings to never rely on mathematical surety when weaknesses are far more likely to be found in the faulty

Re: [303] If you're sick of crypto talk don't read this (fwd)

What is peculiar about the rejoinders to Lucky's sensible proposal is the dismissal of it with elaborate affirmations of mathematical surety, as if there has not been voluminous warnings to never rely on mathematical surety when weaknesses are far more likely to be found in the faulty