From: Mike McNally <m5@tivoli.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 71eee121be07e13c82b042426afd5ed6a0924bb74cb1a4074b4345c4022c2d69
Message ID: <3299D9C1.5A53@tivoli.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-11-25 17:40:08 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 09:40:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Mike McNally <m5@tivoli.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 09:40:08 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Smart card attacks vs. clipper?
Message-ID: <3299D9C1.5A53@tivoli.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Has any work been done (yet) using the recently-publicised techniques
used to foil smart card tamperproofing against Clipper implementations?
Seems like it's a bit of a different story, since in the Clipper's
case the algorithm is (ostensibly) unknown, but I'm just curious as
to whether there is some compromise of its security-through-obscurity.
--
______c_________________________________________________________________
Mike M Nally * IBM % Tivoli * Austin TX * How quickly we forget that
mailto:m5@tivoli.com mailto:m101@io.com * "deer processing" and "data
http://www.io.com/~m101/ * processing" are different!
Return to November 1996
Return to “Mike McNally <m5@tivoli.com>”
1996-11-25 (Mon, 25 Nov 1996 09:40:08 -0800 (PST)) - Smart card attacks vs. clipper? - Mike McNally <m5@tivoli.com>