1996-05-30 - Re: Ok, what about PGP (was: MD5 collisions)

Header Data

From: Derek Atkins <warlord@MIT.EDU>
To: wlkngowl@unix.asb.com (Mutatis Mutantdis)
Message Hash: 171cc712bc36098d27bf287ed8b9632ec6d9ae84c2753026235c0518b0a5c63a
Message ID: <199605292310.TAA20965@toxicwaste.media.mit.edu>
Reply To: <199605292005.QAA27595@unix.asb.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-05-30 03:19:11 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 11:19:11 +0800

Raw message

From: Derek Atkins <warlord@MIT.EDU>
Date: Thu, 30 May 1996 11:19:11 +0800
To: wlkngowl@unix.asb.com (Mutatis Mutantdis)
Subject: Re: Ok, what about PGP (was: MD5 collisions)
In-Reply-To: <199605292005.QAA27595@unix.asb.com>
Message-ID: <199605292310.TAA20965@toxicwaste.media.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> It seems quite doable to add support for SHA-1 signatures (and possibly key
> generation for encrypting secret keys?).
> 
> Adding 3DES (and maybe Luby-Rackoff-SHA, assuming it hasn't been cracked
> recently at the Fast Software Conf.... more info?!?) would be nifty too...
> unless, of course, there's meaning to the Real Soon Now that PGP3 folx
> claim.

Both of these algorithms are currently in the PGPlib sources.

-derek





Thread