1992-10-10 - Re: +-=*^

Header Data

From: George A. Gleason <gg@well.sf.ca.us>
To: shipley@tfs.COM
Message Hash: 9f9ab965d5daaa3b67ebb796710219c37a55caab3934dc2a4158e0c9ba248a05
Message ID: <199210100906.AA26559@well.sf.ca.us>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1992-10-10 08:59:50 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 01:59:50 PDT

Raw message

From: George A. Gleason <gg@well.sf.ca.us>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 01:59:50 PDT
To: shipley@tfs.COM
Subject: Re: +-=*^
Message-ID: <199210100906.AA26559@well.sf.ca.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


I've seen a number of postings so far about "secure *and* authenticated"
requiring advance in-person distribution of key material.  This would seem
to eliminate the main advantage of public key systems, i.e. open
distribution of public keys.  So as long as we're handling key material in
person, how about one-time systems, eh?  Absolutely secure, provably so,
obsolescence-proof, simple & straightforward.  Not particularly exciting
from a theoretical point of view, but one-time systems are practical and on
the bottom line, they work.  What do y'all think...?

-gg@well.sf.ca.us





Thread