From: "Mark M." <markm@voicenet.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 1996 10:13:39 -0800 (PST)
To: jonathon <grafolog@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Announcement: Very Good Privacy
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.95.961130080157.18557I-100000@netcom17>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.961130131239.357A-100000@gak.voicenet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Sat, 30 Nov 1996, jonathon wrote:

> On Fri, 29 Nov 1996, Mark Rosen wrote:
> 
> > 	I have written an encryption program called Very Good Privacy 
> 
> 	Trademark violation here.   Probably not a good thing.

Nope.  "Pretty Good" is trademarked, but "Very Good" isn't.

> 	I'm not sure how an encryption product that uses encryption
> 	algorithms weaker than Pretty Good Privacy can be described
> 	as being better than PGP.  

Both programs use IDEA.  How is this weaker?

> 
> 	Especially when all the algorithms listed have known problems
> 	of one kind, or another.   << And yes, I know that the known
> 	problems -- in some instances --- are entirely theoretical in
> 	nature.  >>

RC4 has stood up to cryptanalysis.  It's secure as long as the same key isn't
used twice.

Mark
- -- 
finger -l for PGP key
PGP encrypted mail prefered.
0xf9b22ba5 now revoked

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBMqB58CzIPc7jvyFpAQGEgwf/VZ8gf+W84DV0cSCSnUNgKEqF/G2fKX4C
bJAkY1FSz3edH4Y+KyWkVIVkpLRmBTSNTV45secSeyVGdvnjAX4zcnUld6hOIGSc
bqE6hge9CQpWxsojckulwNTPphL4ZRLLA4UJViObOYZs8jJi6b4aZ8FPHfQwCdBh
H64rGSGsEFj3WuDoH4nVgnNzwxXxLLllTAOOic8HFqRn2BeqxGRlkvGTraxE+on/
pKQ55CUQNBUu7L05lGp4njc1qZRpe9EeCLChRCEP6FVmy9iBtIRFH+lzRquDR+A4
lARm8zR1QKwDcCSzz8OPN52Lp/rICmcHWR7Lfhw/Vy8D6NxqG1lmuA==
=CPKh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----