From: dustman@athensnet.com (Anonymous)
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 17:48:27 -0700 (PDT)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: [PGP] Re: FYI - Biham/Shamir Differential Fault Analysis of DES, etc.
In-Reply-To: <199610190449.WAA06334@zifi.genetics.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <199610200035.UAA11609@porky.athensnet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> As usual, Blaze/AT&T uses cypherpunks to spread FUD from it's NSA masters.
> This time, however, he's stolen the work of others and twisted it to suit
> the corporate goals. Bet his next message is a commercial from AT&T for the
> clipper chip, which, they will ass-u-re us, fixes this socalled <<attack>>.
> Someone should sue Blaze and AT&T.

How much of a bonus do you think he got for exposing the flaw in the
clipper chip?

> Blaze, who is a wellknown homosexual Jew, probably can expect a nice bonus
> in next weeks blood money check for thinking of this latest little stunt,
> so I'm sure he can afford the legal fees. Just a cost of doing biz, right?

Is there anything wrong with being a homosexual Jew?  Can you
elaborate?

> Shame on him!
> 
> p.S. I know this post sounds angry but this kind of shit just pisses me off
> so much.

Exactly what pisses you off?

The message Blase posted implies that there are serious problems with
making "tamperproof" devices.  This sounds like good news to me, as it
makes it significantly harder for the government to realy on the
secrecy of encryption keys for "LEAF" packets.

If you think there is something incorrect or dishonest about the
announcement Blaze forwarded, I'd like to hear about it.  However, I'm
trying to follow your logic but can't figure it out.  You claim:

  1.  Blaze stole the work of others.

How can this be since he clearly attributed the message to
Biham/Shamir

  2.  He's twisted the work to fit his corporate needs.

How does discrediting tamper-proof hardware fit the needs of AT&T?

  3.  Blaze is about to endorse the clipper chip in his next message.

Why would Blaze endorse a system he has already shown is flawed?
Anyway, since he hasn't endorsed the clipper chip yet, why can't we
wait and see what he does before attacking him?