1994-07-06 - Re: Windows for Workgroups 3.11
Header Data
From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@imsi.com>
To: Mike Markley <mmarkley@microsoft.com>
Message Hash: 49d43326b99c51272e9c69f82c1f035d841f8d857f28ffda946ff7b74fc7adbb
Message ID: <9407061748.AA00678@snark.imsi.com>
Reply To: <9407061641.AA00597@netmail2.microsoft.com>
UTC Datetime: 1994-07-06 17:48:55 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 10:48:55 PDT
Raw message
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 94 10:48:55 PDT
To: Mike Markley <mmarkley@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: Windows for Workgroups 3.11
In-Reply-To: <9407061641.AA00597@netmail2.microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <9407061748.AA00678@snark.imsi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Mike Markley says:
> I'll definitely agree that for something as binding as a signature that
> I would want to have a very large key. For daily communication it seems
> that fairly weak keys should be more than adequate as long as they
> can't be broken in a reasonable amount of time.
Historical traffic only a few months old is way too interesting for me
to accept that. One of the real advantages of Diffie-Hellman style
systems is, by the way, the protection they provide against breaking
historical traffic.
Perry
Thread
Return to July 1994
- Return to “Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>”
- Return to “Mike Markley <mmarkley@microsoft.com>”
- Return to ““Perry E. Metzger” <perry@imsi.com>”
Return to “Roger Bryner <bryner@atlas.chem.utah.edu>”
- 1994-07-06 (Wed, 6 Jul 94 10:39:52 PDT) - Re: Windows for Workgroups 3.11 - Mike Markley <mmarkley@microsoft.com>
- 1994-07-06 (Wed, 6 Jul 94 10:48:55 PDT) - Re: Windows for Workgroups 3.11 - “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@imsi.com>
- 1994-07-06 (Wed, 6 Jul 94 11:28:50 PDT) - Re: Windows for Workgroups 3.11 - Roger Bryner <bryner@atlas.chem.utah.edu>
- 1994-07-06 (Wed, 6 Jul 94 12:54:17 PDT) - Re: Windows for Workgroups 3.11 - Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>