cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1995-10-10 - Re: Certificate proposal

Header Data

From: m5@dev.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
To: Scott Brickner <sjb@universe.digex.net>
Message Hash: a86b7665da14f8dc9bb014dc7a0d8cc38dc5c471b5053c4ed1ea1c7f98ae021f
Message ID: <9510101243.AA28296@alpha>
Reply To: <9510092311.AA27677@alpha>
UTC Datetime: 1995-10-10 12:44:46 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 10 Oct 95 05:44:46 PDT

Raw message

From: m5@dev.tivoli.com (Mike McNally)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 95 05:44:46 PDT
To: Scott Brickner <sjb@universe.digex.net>
Subject: Re: Certificate proposal
In-Reply-To: <9510092311.AA27677@alpha>
Message-ID: <9510101243.AA28296@alpha>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Scott Brickner writes:
 > I disagree.  The MITM is foiled by one successful communication. 

I'm going to need some clarification of this; what is meant by
"successful"?  If you mean "a communication without a MITM
participating", and presuming also that that communication would
involve a key validation, then I suppose it's true.  However, I don't
see how this success can be evaluated if the parties do not have
nearly complete control over the communications substrate.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| Nobody's going to listen to you if you just | Mike McNally (m5@tivoli.com) |
| stand there and flap your arms like a fish. | Tivoli Systems, Austin TX    |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thread