On 3 Aug 2014 17:16 +0200, from lazyvi...@gmx.com (B):
> * Is C a good candidate to write crypto?
>NOT AT ALL, a _very strict_ language should be used instead,
>such as ADA (think contracts, and do not think it is slow).
>Programs have bugs, we all know that, but crypto bugs are
>
On Mon, 04 Aug 2014 04:08:15 +1000
Andrew McGlashan wrote:
> All good points, trouble I see is that even /good/ teams can become
> violated by someone ... NSA working with NIST is one example;
This is why an international team is important, with
redundant checks and controls.
> I'm
> not going
On 4/08/2014 1:16 AM, B wrote:
> The question raise the underlying problems:
> * Should we pay for good crypto (and very good cryptanalysis)?
> I think YES (stop yelling, think crowfunding;), because
> good crypto skills are rare and thus expensive;
> furthermore, we need stable
On Sun, 03 Aug 2014 10:43:18 -0400
Harry Putnam wrote:
> Gack,,, I duplicated your posted URL before seeing your post
You will rot in a windows-only hell for that!
(without a debugger) *<;-p)
The question raise the underlying problems:
* Is crypto a specialist affair?
YES it is, indeed.
*
4 matches
Mail list logo
