1993-08-27 - Re: .Comparing ViaCrypt and freeware.

Header Data

From: peter honeyman <honey@citi.umich.edu>
To: bill@twwells.com (T. William Wells)
Message Hash: 041a05aef65334268c5bb3016229e88c45a7fe7912c0a07fe7b869bac31a2ea6
Message ID: <9308272102.AA17377@toad.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1993-08-27 21:02:56 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 27 Aug 93 14:02:56 PDT

Raw message

From: peter honeyman <honey@citi.umich.edu>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 93 14:02:56 PDT
To: bill@twwells.com (T. William Wells)
Subject: Re: .Comparing ViaCrypt and freeware.
Message-ID: <9308272102.AA17377@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> If you're worried about backdoors, reverse engineer it and verify
> that it works as advertised. Given that the program has to largely
> duplicate an existing set of source, this should be trivial.

do you mean decompile it, or reverse engineer it based on the
outputs?  that former is tractable, but i suspect the latter is
comparable to "busting" the idea algorithm.

neither is "trivial" in my mind.

	peter






Thread