From: VACCINIA@UNCVX1.OIT.UNC.EDU
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 94 18:34:33 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: RE:LEAF forgery
Message-ID: <01HD4CD6HPJM0044FJ@UNCVX1.OIT.UNC.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Perry responding to one of the points I made Said:

>VACCINIA@uncvx1.oit.unc.edu says:
>> How true, yet the NSA also had a lot to lose by putting out a flawed 
>> backdoor in Skipjack which essentially negates much of this features (LEAF)
>> value. They did so none the less.

>All the evidence is that it was an accident. You contend, without
>evidence or even a rational reason, that they did it intentionally.

I do not contend this, I contend they were negligent in checking their work.
That they were lax in their standards and that this lackadaisical attitude 
bespeakes arrogance. An arrogance that would allow them to think that they 
COULD put in a trapdoor (besides the LEAF) in Skipjack and easily get away 
with it.

>I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I operate on evidence and the
>assumption that people behave in their self interest. NSA had nothing
>to gain by sabotaging their own efforts in this manner. Even if they
>had another back door it is worth their while to make the public back
>door as good as possible. The notion that they would have done it
>badly intentionally for no reason when doing it well would be easy is
>at the very least without evidence or even rational suspicion.
>
>What would they possibly have to gain via such an act?

It would be in the NSA's self interest to have there own little door into 
Skipjack, wouldn't you say? Especially when the agency is quite satisfied 
that no one knows their algorithm. I don't see the evidence you are operating 
on, but will grant you the self interest part I mentioned above.

>> In addition, it is possible that the agency is not alarmed about their LEAF
>> problems because they don't need to use it.

>They may be able redesign the system before widespread deployment.
>Its also in their interest to play mistakes down. How do YOU know they
>aren't really embarassed?

Well, they did say so. But, I did agree with the play down mistakes position 
in the last post.


Vaccinia@uncvx1.oit.unc.edu


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.3a

iQCVAgUBLe/ZTT2paOMjHHAhAQHOCgP+MPt5QxnQF/2rbPpFWZi8t6iTb+6x45OF
sHoC7nZ/yLBjMpn8SdR4Jzf36m2yndQcVVBPAVkfMOAJ0V+mAZcrCqH+jrZWuX55
4Z1/A3fkuFmIp3/7irGnQENQ4PBcWZb7gSihPk4Ytc4EjTKdIDc9U6T5xtx+FbT2
/+7D259kgLE=
=WPJQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----