1996-10-04 - Re: The New GAK-Clipper Thing will Fail

Header Data

From: Simon Spero <ses@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
To: “Timothy C. May” <tcmay@got.net>
Message Hash: fa908576f458f8b241cbe51955971dcfa5bf7e112b03ca75ceb5cd141aa4e613
Message ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.961003161001.21310A-100000@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
Reply To: <v03007804ae79b86b481c@[207.167.93.63]>
UTC Datetime: 1996-10-04 02:39:07 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 10:39:07 +0800

Raw message

From: Simon Spero <ses@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 10:39:07 +0800
To: "Timothy C. May" <tcmay@got.net>
Subject: Re: The New GAK-Clipper Thing will Fail
In-Reply-To: <v03007804ae79b86b481c@[207.167.93.63]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.961003161001.21310A-100000@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


side-point:

Somebody mentioned that one of the features in the new go-around is that 
only session keys need to be made available, and warrants will be needed 
for each message to be decrypted.

Doesn't this essentially rule out the use DSS/Diffie Helman based
key-exchanges, or at least diffie-helman with ephemeral paramaters? 

Simon
	DId you know that the Polish Train company is called PKP? 
	Coincidence - you decide.


---
Cause maybe  (maybe)		      | In my mind I'm going to Carolina
you're gonna be the one that saves me | - back in Chapel Hill May 16th.
And after all			      | Email address remains unchanged
You're my firewall -    	      | ........First in Usenet.........





Thread