1995-08-20 - Re: Another SSL breakage…

Header Data

From: Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>
To: bdavis@thepoint.net (Brian Davis)
Message Hash: 93f172af73164c726f22415609bc23ef58653f69bc0c3178c6293d4a33279203
Message ID: <199508202119.RAA12053@hermes.bwh.harvard.edu>
Reply To: <Pine.D-G.3.91.950820165648.14336E-100000@dg.thepoint.net>
UTC Datetime: 1995-08-20 21:21:05 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 20 Aug 95 14:21:05 PDT

Raw message

From: Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 95 14:21:05 PDT
To: bdavis@thepoint.net (Brian Davis)
Subject: Re: Another SSL breakage...
In-Reply-To: <Pine.D-G.3.91.950820165648.14336E-100000@dg.thepoint.net>
Message-ID: <199508202119.RAA12053@hermes.bwh.harvard.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



| So ... has this proven that the banning of strong crypto is the correct 
| way to go, and that, at least to some, credit card transactions using 
| weak crypto will be acceptable to most (given the ease of getting CC#s 
| other ways)?

	No.  Banning strong crypto will not help; those darn furriners
are using it anyway.  What it will mean is that the Information
Infrastructure of the future will bypass the United States, as without
strong cryptography, it is impossible to build a secure architechture.

	Should the United States wish to relagate itself to the status
of a third world nation becuase of terrorists, druge dealers, child
pornorgaphers and money launderers, that is indeed unfortunate.

Adam


-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume





Thread