1994-07-06 - Re: Windows for Workgroups 3.11

Header Data

From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@imsi.com>
To: Mike Markley <mmarkley@microsoft.com>
Message Hash: 49d43326b99c51272e9c69f82c1f035d841f8d857f28ffda946ff7b74fc7adbb
Message ID: <9407061748.AA00678@snark.imsi.com>
Reply To: <9407061641.AA00597@netmail2.microsoft.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-07-06 17:48:55 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 10:48:55 PDT

Raw message

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 10:48:55 PDT
To: Mike Markley <mmarkley@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: Windows for Workgroups 3.11
In-Reply-To: <9407061641.AA00597@netmail2.microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <9407061748.AA00678@snark.imsi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Mike Markley says:
> I'll definitely agree that for something as binding as a signature that 
> I would want to have a very large key. For daily communication it seems 
> that fairly weak keys should be more than adequate as long as they 
> can't be broken in a reasonable amount of time.

Historical traffic only a few months old is way too interesting for me
to accept that. One of the real advantages of Diffie-Hellman style
systems is, by the way, the protection they provide against breaking
historical traffic.

Perry





Thread