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: 5806445869b6e23a3f50db249c8e7afcbd72ac82f1ee09c6cb2633c5ae3532c2
Message ID: <9407061715.AA00550@snark.imsi.com>
Reply To: <9407061557.AA27737@netmail2.microsoft.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-07-06 17:15:59 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 10:15:59 PDT

Raw message

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 10:15:59 PDT
To: Mike Markley <mmarkley@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: Windows for Workgroups 3.11
In-Reply-To: <9407061557.AA27737@netmail2.microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <9407061715.AA00550@snark.imsi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Mike Markley says:
> The 129 digit key was broken in 8 calendar months and not 8 CPU months, 
> correct? If so then for most purposes a 129 digit key is more than 
> adequate. If you are faxing a contract to someone then if the deal 
> isn't signed in 8 months the odds are that information about it will 
> leak from a different source than your fax.

This isn't true. If you are signing the contract digitally, for
instance, you would want to be sure that no one could forge your
signature to change the terms after the fact -- a few months isn't
enough for such purposes, only something that will last for fifteen or
twenty years is okay.

Perry





Thread