From: Sergey Goldgaber <sergey@delbruck.pharm.sunysb.edu>
To: cort <cort@ecn.purdue.edu>
Message Hash: bdd4256d28c7e6e2c731a9379005c14e77c188114d9f611d9e808498817824fd
Message ID: <Pine.3.89.9402251208.C1961-0100000@delbruck.pharm.sunysb.edu>
Reply To: <9402250101.AA05179@en.ecn.purdue.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1994-02-25 18:07:16 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 25 Feb 94 10:07:16 PST
From: Sergey Goldgaber <sergey@delbruck.pharm.sunysb.edu>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 94 10:07:16 PST
To: cort <cort@ecn.purdue.edu>
Subject: Re: your mail
In-Reply-To: <9402250101.AA05179@en.ecn.purdue.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9402251208.C1961-0100000@delbruck.pharm.sunysb.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
On Thu, 24 Feb 1994, cort wrote:
> When the file is executed, it will ask Ida a question that Fred
> has set up (with her in mind). This question will ideally be
> answerable only by Ida. If Ida answers correctly, her response
> will form a key to decrypt the message.
There might be a problem in that Ida would have to phrase the answer
_exactly_ in the way that the sender has anticipated it would be phrased.
For example, Fred might ask:
"Where were we when we first kissed?"
Ida may answer:
"In the back of a dumpster truck"
Although correct, Fred may have anticipaded:
"In a dumpster truck"
There has to be a provision for unambiguous wording. Even a question as
simple as:
"How old are you?"
may be answered in more than one way
"99"
"ninety-nine"
"99.5"
"ninety-nine and one half"
Knowing the answer yet having the program reject the "correct" answer
time after time may frustrate your PGP-Self-Decrypt unaware user.
> It would be a nice augmentation to the PGP package!
>
Why use PGP? As I understand it, the virtue of PGP lies in it's
handling of public and secret keys. Any semi-secure algorythm may be
used with a self-decrypt program.
> Cort.
> --
> cort@cc.purdue.edu
>
Sergey
Return to February 1994
Return to “Sergey Goldgaber <sergey@delbruck.pharm.sunysb.edu>”