From: SINCLAIR DOUGLAS N <sinclai@ecf.toronto.edu>
To: perry@piermont.com
Message Hash: d72c81055767f961acef03fede4983a2737e2a0c0764d902f910033558de22a6
Message ID: <96Apr14.100201edt.1826@cannon.ecf.toronto.edu>
Reply To: <199604140849.EAA05136@jekyll.piermont.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-04-14 16:21:22 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 00:21:22 +0800
From: SINCLAIR DOUGLAS N <sinclai@ecf.toronto.edu>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 00:21:22 +0800
To: perry@piermont.com
Subject: Re: carrick, Blowfish & the NSA
In-Reply-To: <199604140849.EAA05136@jekyll.piermont.com>
Message-ID: <96Apr14.100201edt.1826@cannon.ecf.toronto.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
> Jerry Whiting writes:
> > One reason we chose to use Blowfish as the basis for carrick is that
> > it _is_ a new algorithm. One has to assume that the NSA et al. has
> > tools optimized to crack DES and possibly IDEA/RSA. At least let's
> > give them something else to sweat over.
>
> They won't sweat over it long. Blowfish was broken.
Yikes! Are you sure? This is the first I've heard of it. This would mean
that PGPPhone is not secure.
Return to April 1996
Return to “Wei Dai <weidai@eskimo.com>”