From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
To: Ernest Hua <hua@XENON.chromatic.com>
Message Hash: 285d8cc7a887a66aa93c46445f0d0ea57c25ad508541266fb86de9aa6c5353c4
Message ID: <Pine.SUN.3.93.960524114646.657D-100000@polaris.mindport.net>
Reply To: <199605230053.RAA28116@ohio.chromatic.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-05-24 22:26:55 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 06:26:55 +0800
From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
Date: Sat, 25 May 1996 06:26:55 +0800
To: Ernest Hua <hua@XENON.chromatic.com>
Subject: Re: Layman's explanation for limits on escrowed encryption ...
In-Reply-To: <199605230053.RAA28116@ohio.chromatic.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.93.960524114646.657D-100000@polaris.mindport.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
On Wed, 22 May 1996, Ernest Hua wrote:
> Could someone with some knowledge of NSA/DoS/FBI intentions please
> explain why key length limitations are necessary for escrowed
> encryption?
To deal with the possibility that someone might slip through the cracks of
the escrow process.
Insurance.
>
> Please reply by E-Mail.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Ern
>
---
My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li
"In fact, had Bancroft not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est
Franklin might have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti
00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information
Opp. Counsel: For all your expert testimony needs: jimbell@pacifier.com
Return to May 1996
Return to “Mike Fletcher <fletch@ain.bls.com>”