1997-01-10 - Re: Why are 1024 bit keys the limit right now?

Header Data

From: Jason Burrell <jburrell@crl.crl.com>
To: Derek Atkins <warlord@MIT.EDU>
Message Hash: ee90f8932ed388f35307ca91d9c1df7fbd21bcad08abf39ae05e2000abf9d1a5
Message ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970109233335.440A-100000@crl.crl.com>
Reply To: <sjmloa3yiif.fsf@bart-savagewood.mit.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1997-01-10 05:35:33 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 21:35:33 -0800 (PST)

Raw message

From: Jason Burrell <jburrell@crl.crl.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 21:35:33 -0800 (PST)
To: Derek Atkins <warlord@MIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: Why are 1024 bit keys the limit right now?
In-Reply-To: <sjmloa3yiif.fsf@bart-savagewood.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970109233335.440A-100000@crl.crl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On 8 Jan 1997, Derek Atkins wrote:

> There is no PGP 2.6.3; at least not that came from MIT... Someone
> else may have made something claiming to be 2.6.3, but it did not
> originate from MIT.

There is a pgp 2.6.3i. Apparently, it's another "international" version. I
believe it's on one of the usual sites, but I don't know what's changed in
it.


--
Good government. Good government. Sit. Stay.

Thread

• Return to January 1997

• Return to “Derek Atkins <warlord@MIT.EDU>”
• Return to ““James A. Tunnicliffe” <Tunny@inference.com>”
• Return to “Jason Burrell <jburrell@crl.crl.com>”

• Return to ““Mark M.” <markm@voicenet.com>”

• 1997-01-08 (Wed, 8 Jan 1997 08:00:51 -0800 (PST)) - RE: Why are 1024 bit keys the limit right now? - “James A. Tunnicliffe” <Tunny@inference.com>
  • 1997-01-08 (Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:59:50 -0800 (PST)) - RE: Why are 1024 bit keys the limit right now? - “Mark M.” <markm@voicenet.com>
    • 1997-01-08 (Wed, 8 Jan 1997 13:17:45 -0800 (PST)) - Re: Why are 1024 bit keys the limit right now? - Derek Atkins <warlord@MIT.EDU>
      • 1997-01-10 (Thu, 9 Jan 1997 21:35:33 -0800 (PST)) - Re: Why are 1024 bit keys the limit right now? - Jason Burrell <jburrell@crl.crl.com>