From: <remail@desert.hacktic.nl>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 2702856859f5e8ab72ebfcbf4722577ef21ad85814ce8b8669775fc91be6ae0b
Message ID: <199406041028.AA22629@xs4all.hacktic.nl>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1994-06-04 10:28:41 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 4 Jun 94 03:28:41 PDT
From: <remail@desert.hacktic.nl>
Date: Sat, 4 Jun 94 03:28:41 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: *** Flash - N.Y. Times on Clipper Flaw **
Message-ID: <199406041028.AA22629@xs4all.hacktic.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
> ...
> HOW THE CLIPPER TECHNOLOGY IS FLAWED
>
> 1. Taking advantage of desing imperfections, people trying to defeat the
> system could repeatedly alter the LEAF until it erroneously passed the
> "checksum" verification, despite an invalid session-key number.
This sounds like a very simple computation. How much would it cost
to fab up some chips to do this, and solder them into the circuitry
next to the Clipper chip? Or is there an even easier way to do this?
Return to June 1994
Return to “<remail@desert.hacktic.nl>”
1994-06-04 (Sat, 4 Jun 94 03:28:41 PDT) - *** Flash - N.Y. Times on Clipper Flaw ** - <remail@desert.hacktic.nl>