1996-02-29 - Re: A brief comparison of email encryption protocols

Header Data

From: cme@cybercash.com (Carl Ellison)
To: Laurence Lundblade <lgl@qualcomm.com>
Message Hash: fa56cb01cbe2590a2e53808a6fcb29507bb9651124ccb2aa6bde1d55e77aff1a
Message ID: <v02140b17ad5bacd3a265@[204.254.34.231]>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-02-29 22:40:30 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 1 Mar 1996 06:40:30 +0800

Raw message

From: cme@cybercash.com (Carl Ellison)
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 1996 06:40:30 +0800
To: Laurence Lundblade <lgl@qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: A brief comparison of email encryption protocols
Message-ID: <v02140b17ad5bacd3a265@[204.254.34.231]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 12:01 2/29/96, Laurence Lundblade wrote:
>I think a problem occurs when you have 20 billion of
>these certs (two for every person in the year 2010 or such).  A simple hash
>into a table isn't going to cut it because you a single database (with
>replication?) isn't going to be possible.

BTW, at the rate that memory gets cheaper and smaller, it might be quite
reasonable to have that single database fit alongside your daily appointments
in your shirt-pocket daily organizer and e-mail terminal, in 2010.


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Carl M. Ellison          cme@cybercash.com   http://www.clark.net/pub/cme |
|CyberCash, Inc., Suite 430                   http://www.cybercash.com/    |
|2100 Reston Parkway           PGP 2.6.2: 61E2DE7FCB9D7984E9C8048BA63221A2 |
|Reston, VA 22091      Tel: (703) 620-4200                                 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+







Thread