cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1994-05-24 - patch to PGP 2.6

Header Data

From: cort <cort@ecn.purdue.edu>
To: hughes@ah.com (Eric Hughes)
Message Hash: 21f4d4175775f6ff14c61f663c649461ac6b84fe95dbafcd75ffb776e4b127b2
Message ID: <199405241830.NAA12504@en.ecn.purdue.edu>
Reply To: <9405241450.AA16918@ah.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-05-24 18:31:03 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 24 May 94 11:31:03 PDT

Raw message

From: cort <cort@ecn.purdue.edu>
Date: Tue, 24 May 94 11:31:03 PDT
To: hughes@ah.com (Eric Hughes)
Subject: patch to PGP 2.6
In-Reply-To: <9405241450.AA16918@ah.com>
Message-ID: <199405241830.NAA12504@en.ecn.purdue.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


> The only change the future post-September PGP 2.6 messages will have
> is a change in the version number byte from 2 to 3.  PC's little hack
> not to check version numbers will work, but as a patch it's not the
> most robust.  It would be more robust if it checked for the range
> [2..3].

Agreed.

> Another thing a patched 2.3 release would have to do to be fully
> indistinguishable is to generate new version numbers itself after the
> given date.

Is "indistinguishability" the point or "interoperability"?

If the latter, then no change to generated version numbers should
be necessary/desired.  I believe that 2.6 plans to read previous
versions just fine.

Cort.

Thread