From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@snark.imsi.com>
To: Ed Carp <ecarp@netcom.com>
Message Hash: 49b4731fedafb3abf36caeb33ef1b58d53e35c9b57c06ddcfbc27eec3e70667c
Message ID: <9404252120.AA05992@snark.imsi.com>
Reply To: <Pine.3.89.9404251427.A28811-0100000@netcom10>
UTC Datetime: 1994-04-25 21:21:03 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 14:21:03 PDT
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@snark.imsi.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 94 14:21:03 PDT
To: Ed Carp <ecarp@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Wow, what a key!
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9404251427.A28811-0100000@netcom10>
Message-ID: <9404252120.AA05992@snark.imsi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Ed Carp says:
> > As I've mentioned previously to people, there is an actual, live,
> > honest to god RFC for doing authentication and encryption of telnet
> > sessions, and the 4.4 BSD release contains the actual, honest to god
> > code. I would suggest looking at that before reinventing the wheel.
> > All sites ought to support it -- its a big win.
>
> Well, last time I looked for it, I couldn't find it. And doesn't it use DES?
The RFC doesn't specify an encryption system. Its been a while since
I've looked at the Cray code.
> What does it use for key exchange?
I don't believe the Cray implementation had a key exchange system, but
I believe that hooks for one were present in the protocol.
> I'd also have to hack it quite a bit to port it to linux, I think.
I believe Linux has a fairly conventional sockets library.
In any case, Jim Thompson has promised us an improved version of the
code, so I'd wait for his hacks...
Perry
Return to April 1994
Return to “tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)”