From: futplex@pseudonym.com (Futplex)
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 95 01:45:34 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List)
Subject: Re: "S1" encryption system (was: this looked like it might be interesting)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950810012027.18054B-100000@rwd.goucher.edu>
Message-ID: <199508100845.EAA18756@thor.cs.umass.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Jon writes:
> Two other possibilities: (1) It's merely an independently produced 
> cryptosystem disguised as a "leak" to save its creator the trouble of 
> asking experts to analyze it for him/her.  

It strikes me as rather foolish to mail off anonymous copies to several
individual recipients (Matt, Perry, Tim, ...) in addition to the list, if
S1 is a real leak. Why aid the traffic analysts by firing off multiple
messages through the remailers ?

BTW, the code has been posted to Usenet by a Frank Falstaff -- look for
message ID <40b8tk$cj4@news.xs4all.nl> in sci.crypt (Wed, Aug. 9, 1995).
His article refers to a message ID (namely <40b50l$oa8@utopia.hacktic.nl>)
that differs from the message ID of the copy sent to c'punks. So it looks
like there was at least one additional recipient. That's a minimum of 5
originals so far....

-Futplex