1997-06-25 - Re: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes II

Header Data

From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
To: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
Message Hash: 6cc5d0edf8ac0185b2ddf51df2de88ef403a985170e6816a87d32737a5291327
Message ID: <v03007829afd64d414288@[168.161.105.191]>
Reply To: <199706242233.XAA00222@server.test.net>
UTC Datetime: 1997-06-25 04:43:45 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 12:43:45 +0800

Raw message

From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 12:43:45 +0800
To: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Comparing Cryptographic Key Sizes II
In-Reply-To: <199706242233.XAA00222@server.test.net>
Message-ID: <v03007829afd64d414288@[168.161.105.191]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



At 23:33 +0100 6/24/97, Adam Back wrote:
>I don't think we can explain it any more technically and expect it to
>be useful to a journalist.

Um, some of us journalists have *gasp* taken computer science classes,
programmed in machine code, crafted compression routines, written our own
Unix shells, etc.

Now, I don't want to start a "who's the geekiest geek" contest, since y'all
will win hands-down -- but I want to point out that while we may not be
crypto-whizzes, not all of us are entirely clueless either.

-Declan







Thread