cryptoanarchy.wiki

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

1995-08-03 - Re: There’s a hole in your crypto…

Header Data

From: Nathan Loofbourrow <loofbour@cis.ohio-state.edu>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 7352fbca318d04140e7edcc8e773f69c6866e37b7d8927df6230145317ad5390
Message ID: <199508031709.NAA29005@colon.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Reply To: <199508021251.IAA08192@detroit.freenet.org>
UTC Datetime: 1995-08-03 17:10:16 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 3 Aug 95 10:10:16 PDT

Raw message

From: Nathan Loofbourrow <loofbour@cis.ohio-state.edu>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 95 10:10:16 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: There's a hole in your crypto...
In-Reply-To: <199508021251.IAA08192@detroit.freenet.org>
Message-ID: <199508031709.NAA29005@colon.cis.ohio-state.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Nathan Zook writes:
 > > And is there any way to build trusted system out of small, verifiable
 > > pieces?  Since the way they're connected could also be questioned, I
 > > suspect that when you put enough of them together it's just as bad as
 > > the case of a single, monolithic program.  But this isn't my area, so
 > > I don't know.
 > 
 > No.  This was essentially proved during the first third of this century.

Well, I haven't gotten a reply from Nathan Zook on this assertion, so
can anyone else back it up with some references? Perhaps we're
discussing different contexts, but proving correct systems composed of
correct components is still a subject of active research.

nathan

Thread